AAPS superintendent Todd Roberts, taking copious notes during last Wednesday's school board meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

The AAPS board of education voted to consider a resolution to consolidate transportation services at its final meeting on June 23, if a competitive bid is not received by the bus drivers’ union before then. Also, after months of discussion, the board passed the 2010-11 budget and accompanying millage to support it.

Also at Wednesday’s meeting, the board approved a new AP Biology textbook, passed a resolution in support of using the state’s School Aid Fund only to fund K-12 schools, and debated the renewal of a contract to outsource the district’s food service. And, for more than half of its six-hour meeting, the board engaged in non-voting business, receiving updates from Skyline High School staff, the USA Hockey team housed at Pioneer High, and the Intergroup/Social Change Agents, a high school program designed to encourage dialogue on social identities.

Countywide Transportation Consolidation Plan

AAPS superintendent Todd Roberts introduced Robert Allen, AAPS deputy superintendent of operations, and Brian Marcel, assistant superintendent of business services for the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD), saying they were available to answer any questions about the transportation consolidation plan proposed at the board’s June 4 meeting. Allen pointed out that the entire plan is on the board’s website, and said they would begin by asking Marcel to review the plan.

Transportation: Consolidation Background and Savings Goals

Marcel gave some history, saying that in February of 2007, the superintendents, chief financial officers, and members of the school boards from every district in the county met to explore a variety of possible countywide consolidations. At that time, Marcel said, transportation was identified as a possible service to consolidate, with the original intention to privatize consolidated transportation services countywide.

After additional consideration, Marcel continued, the direction of the group changed to wanting to keep employees public, but reap savings as if services were privately run. Consultants were brought in to help create a plan that would yield savings of 18-25%, by focusing on standardizing as much as possible within transportation services across the county. Marcel noted that special education bus routes would change for the upcoming fall, and that general education routes would stay relatively the same for the first year of the program.

Board secretary Glenn Nelson asked what savings would be created by the consolidation plan as it’s been crafted. Allen answered that the AAPS had hoped for $1.5 million in savings, but this plan achieves only $1.3 million the first year. Allen then pointed out that savings could increase in future years, once AAPS routes are made more efficient.

Trustee Simone Lightfoot asked if the WISD anticipated making a profit by administering the consolidated transportation services. Marcel said no, that the program’s finances would be separate from the rest of the WISD. He explained that no profit is expected, but if there were additional savings for some reason, an oversight group could choose either to make a capital investment in the program or provide a rebate to participating districts.

Transportation: Hourly Wages and Salaries

In response to questions raised at the consolidation plan’s first briefing on June 4, Allen had prepared two spreadsheets for Wednesday’s meeting – one sheet broke down bus drivers and monitors by rate of pay and years of service; the other compared the proposed salaries of the consolidation’s central administrators with the WISD recommended salary ranges for those positions.

From the proposed salary spreadsheet, Baskett noted that bus driver supervisor/trainers are slated to make a higher wage under consolidation. She confirmed with Allen that the supervisor/trainers are currently making from $40,000 to $50,000 annually, but that the consolidation’s administrative design team proposes to pay them $49,150. The WISD recommended salary range would bump them up even higher, paying them from $66,203 to $77,857.

From the hourly wage grid, both Baskett and trustee Andy Thomas noted that the 48 drivers making $18.09 per hour at the top of the current pay scale would experience quite a dip in income – down to $16 per hour for general education routes, or down to $16.50 for special education routes. Lightfoot also pointed out the much higher cost of health care for the drivers under consolidation, and stated, “I’m troubled by a few aspects of this plan … We’re asking the lowest wage earners to adjust to the new reality, but not the managers – that’s problematic.”

When Baskett questioned the size of the supervisors’ raises, Marcel reiterated two points he had made at the last meeting – that anyone in WISD supervising 50 employees needs to be paid at that highest compensation range, and that all positions were “benchmarked” to the market. Lightfoot questioned the benchmarks, pointing out that AAPS currently pays the supervisor/monitors much lower than their proposed salaries under the WISD plan. But Marcel said that perhaps AAPS supervisor/trainers have different job descriptions than those positions would have under the WISD plan. Lightfoot countered, “It seems like you’re going with the highest ‘benchmark’ for the upper managers, but the lowest ‘benchmark’ for the drivers.”

Thomas concurred, pointing out that the wage reduction drivers at the top of the pay scale would be asked to take is a 9-12% decrease, not including the increased health care costs. Thomas said he was very troubled by the fact that one group of people were set to take a significant pay cut while others were getting pay raises. He asked how much AAPS drivers are currently paid compared to market benchmarks.

Marcel said that to compare fairly, one has to consider total compensation, since not all districts offer health insurance to drivers. With that in mind, he said, AAPS drivers are not at the top but currently in the top third of the pay range of drivers throughout the county. In terms of the administrators, Marcel again argued that there would have to be some level of salary equity among managers within WISD “so everyone will be happy when we are all one organization.”

Transportation: Hiring and Seniority

Marcel explained that the hiring timeline, also part of Allen’s packet provided to the board, was constructed to hire the program’s administrators first, so they could then be part of hiring those who would report to them. He reiterated that employment records and drug screening would be part of the hiring criteria, but again asserted, “I want to hire bus drivers who are already familiar with the students and with the schools.”

Lightfoot asked about the difference between “seniority” and “experience,” again following up on part of the conversation from the last meeting. Marcel acknowledged that the two words both mean the number of years of accumulated time. However, the reason the WISD team chose to include “experience” as a hiring criteria rather than “seniority” is because of how seniority is used in decision-making. For example, Marcel said, seniority might be applied to allow drivers to select their own routes, whereas under the consolidation plan, the WISD would make all routing decisions.

Process for Approving the Consolidation

Board president Deb Mexicotte asked Marcel which other districts had agreed to participate in the consolidation at this point. Marcel answered that Lincoln, Willow Run, and Ypsilanti are planning to participate in the consolidation of general education routes.  All of the WISD districts except for Chelsea – this includes the three above, plus AAPS, Dexter, Manchester, Milan, Saline, and Whitmore Lake – have agreed to fully consolidate special education routing.  Chelsea, he said, is not interested consolidating either general education or special education services, but is willing to pick up students on its routes that pass through the other districts.

Baskett asked what the board’s options were, and whether an actual resolution would be coming soon. Mexicotte confirmed that if that evening’s resolution passed, it would indicate that the board intends to receive a contract from the WISD for consideration by June 18. “Moving forward tonight,” she clarified, “does not bind us to that contract at this time.” She stated that the board has an obligation to look at any bid received from a bargaining unit side by side with the WISD contract in an open way.

Thomas requested removing the countywide transportation consolidation from the consent agenda, so that it could be further discussed before a vote. Standing independently, the resolution was then moved by vice president Irene Patalan and seconded by treasurer Christine Stead, and discussion continued.

Transportation: Public Commentary on Consolidation

AAPS bus driver Chai Montgomery called the countywide transportation plan “unsound.” He pointed out that the AAPS director of transportation earns $160,000 per year, but that School Bus Fleet magazine says a manager should make around $50,000. There are ways to save, Montgomery said, but it has to start with managerial overhead, and then operational changes can be sought. First, “cut the waste from the top,” he urged.

Another AAPS driver, Richard Miller, argued that consolidating transportation services will cause increasing driver turnover. Honoring seniority, he said, would be an ethical way to rehire, and long-employed drivers are safest. He pointed out that his own salary would go from $18.09 to $16 an hour under consolidation, and urged trustees to vote with their consciences.

Transportation: Rationale for Approving the Consolidation

Baskett asked Allen what, beyond savings, were the differences between privatizing transportation services, consolidating them, and the status quo.

Allen reiterated that if the services are privatized, employees would lose their pensions, and that “many folks get into public education because of the retirement benefits.” He also pointed out that with consolidation, unlike with privatization, the participating districts retain some control over the system. Allen pointed out that the ISD takes its direction from its districts’ superintendents whereas to direct a private company to do something, “it’s usually ‘back to the table’” to renegotiate the terms of the contract. In terms of longevity, Allen said, consolidation is the best model.  Citing economies of scale when purchasing fuel and parts, he also argued, “When you consolidate ten districts, you don’t need ten directors.” Finally, Allen said that the status quo was not sustainable – “there’s no way to cut $20 million without touching employees.”

Nelson said he recognized the legitimacy of different views, but he believed that voting against this plan would lead to increased cuts in instruction and larger class sizes. He announced his intention to support the plan, arguing that there is a basic efficiency to be gained by consolidating, and that the board needs to be focused on its mission to educate children and young people, rather than considering what the cuts mean to adults. Finally, Nelson asserted that savings from this plan will increase after the first year, and that “it will be good for our students over time.”

Lightfoot countered part of Nelson’s view, saying, “I see it as a ‘both/and’ not an ‘either/or’ situation … We have an obligation both to our students and to our employees.” She later said that she, too, would be supporting the plan, with her stated misgivings – “There are changes that can and should be made to the pay structure,” she said. “I hope WISD will take our comments into account … I implore them to do it.” Lastly, Lightfoot pointed out that the state may be requiring districts to consolidate transportation services in the future, and that AAPS may end up ahead of the curve.

Stead identified the board’s current position as a “contraction stage,” and argued that AAPS needs to position itself for longer-term efficiency in light of education’s structural funding deficit. Calling the consolidation plan “the better option on the list of terrible options,” Stead also reminded the board that during the failed countywide schools millage campaign last fall, much of the feedback received from voters called for exploring new approaches to cost-saving, including consolidation. She pointed out, “It would be difficult to go back and ask for support in the future without having taken that feedback into account.”

Thomas thanked Marcel and Allen for their hard work, and said he does see the potential for tremendous benefit to the district in this plan. In considering the consolidation, he said, he keeps coming back to this year’s $20 million deficit, and a potential $15 million deficit for 2010-11. Though he said he has “serious misgivings” about this plan, he said he would support it, and that on the whole, consolidation is the way to go.

Baskett described the consolidation decision as a “tough call.” Privatization is not in anyone’s best interest, she said, and the district can’t stay with the status quo. That leaves the last two options, as she put it – working with the bargaining unit (the union representing bus drivers), while moving forward with the WISD resolution. She encouraged WISD to lower management salaries, and closed with, “I want to stress to the bargaining unit – we’re running out of time.”

Patalan stated, “We are very careful … My job is to keep my eyes on students.” She said she believed that consolidation would be shown to be more efficient, and appreciated that under the plan, drivers would be able to keep their pensions. Lastly, Patalan said, the “efficiency and ecology” of consolidating cannot be overlooked, and that she would support the plan.

Mexicotte asked for a roll call vote, and the trustees each formalized their support. Mexicotte closed by saying the board would expect to receive a contract for review by June 18, to be acted on at the next board meeting on June 23.

Outcome: The board unanimously voted to receive and consider a contract from the WISD to consolidate transportation services with surrounding districts.

2010-11 Budget and Millage Rates Set

Allen took to the podium to field any last questions or comments from the board regarding the district’s 2010-11 budget and accompanying millage resolution. There was little discussion, as the budget had been presented to the board at various stages of development throughout the spring.

Thomas asked about the impact of lower Schools of Choice enrollment than had been budgeted. A memo from Roberts to the board states that 94 students have accepted enrollment – 47 in kindergarten, 27 in 1st grade and 20 in 6th grade. His memo also says that the district is requesting that the state allow a second Schools of Choice application window in August, but that the request might not be approved.

Allen confirmed that if the district is not able to increase Schools of Choice enrollment, it could adversely affect the budget by up to $500,000. He also pointed out that the Options Magnet enrollment is expected to meet its target.

Nelson noted that the millage associated with the 2010-11 budget will be a significant tax rate reduction. In 2000, he said, homeowners in the AAPS district were levied 12.8 mills, including the WISD special education millage. In 2005, the same homeowners were levied 12.7 mills, and in 2010, homeowners will be levied at 11.5 mills.  Nelson summarized by saying, “If we … say we want to pay fewer taxes, we are saying we want to support schools less than those who came before us.”

Nelson then apologized in advance for going off-topic, and proceeded to ask Allen how the new stormwater retention project just completed at Pioneer High School had fared during the storm the previous weekend.

Allen noted that Nelson was referencing the Allen Creek Watershed Project, and said that whether it made a difference depends entirely on where people live. Those who live closer to Pioneer might have noticed a decrease in flooding near them. Noting that he is not a watershed expert, Allen described the project as “collecting the first inch of rainwater, and regulating how it flows back into the system.”

[In response to an emailed query from The Chronicle, Janis Bobrin, the county's water resources commissioner, wrote that the project is designed to help with some quantity management for smaller storms, but is focused on improving the quality of the stormwater flowing from Allen Creek into the Huron River.]

Outcome: The 2010-11 budget was approved as part of the consent agenda described below.

Revised AP Biology Textbook Adopted

It was after midnight when the board opened discussion on the possible adoption of a revised textbook for the district’s AP Biology classes. Pioneer AP Biology teacher Dolores Kingston was still at the meeting – she wanted to be there for the final approval. When the board noticed her, they thanked her for her good work on this issue. Kingston replied, “I’ve been working since November on this – I’m going right to the end!”

Outcome: The consent agenda, containing the 2010-11 budget, the millage resolution, the textbook adoption, and minutes approvals, was moved by Stead, seconded by Patalan, and unanimously approved by trustees Nelson, Mexicotte, Lightfoot, Patalan, Thomas, Stead and Baskett.

Additional Action Items

The board considered two direct action items at this meeting – a resolution to support continued, dedicated funding of the School Aid Fund, and a resolution to hold an executive session to conduct the annual evaluation of AAPS superintendent Todd Roberts.

Resolution to Support the Michigan School Aid Fund

Nelson introduced a resolution, saying it was meant to “put on record” that the board supports the School Aid Fund as it is currently used by the state, which is solely for funding pre-K through 12th grade. Referencing suggestions currently being made by the governor and members of the state legislature to do otherwise, Nelson argued that it was important for the board to state unequivocally that it opposes transferring money out of the School Aid Fund into the general fund, and that it opposes adding other functions to the School Aid Fund. The governor has suggested, for example, that since the School Aid Fund currently has a surplus, perhaps it could be used to add funding to community colleges.

Thomas concurred, saying that this is an example of “not only counting your chickens before they’re hatched. Even after they’re hatched, there are a lot of chicken hawks … out there.”

Baskett and Patalan thanked Nelson for taking the lead on writing the resolution.

Nelson suggested that the signed resolution should be distributed to local elected officials and Gov. Jennifer Granholm. He also encouraged citizens to contact their legislators, and demand that they use the School Aid fund for K-12 education.

Outcome: The motion to support the School Aid Fund was moved by Nelson, seconded by Lightfoot, and unanimously approved by trustees Nelson, Mexicotte, Lightfoot, Patalan, Thomas, Stead and Baskett.

Superintendent Evaluation

Patalan moved to hold an executive session for the purpose of evaluating Roberts at 5:30 p.m. before the next regular meeting, which begins at 7 p.m. on June 23. It was seconded, and approved unanimously.

Outcome: The motion to hold an executive session was unanimously approved by trustees Nelson, Mexicotte, Lightfoot, Patalan, Thomas, Stead and Baskett.

Public Commentary

Several speakers shared thoughts with the board during public commentary. In addition to the responses to possible countywide transportation consolidation reported above, the board heard concerns about privatizing child care, the Thurston driveway project, and needed education reform.

Public Commentary – AAPS Child Care Privatization

Before the meeting, AAPS child care staff members were demonstrating outside the downtown library, where the meeting was held. When approached by The Chronicle, they said they had heard that their jobs were being privatized. Three people spoke to the board with concerns about the possible privatization of the district’s before-and-after-school child care program.

Demonstrators against possible privatization of the AAPS child care program. District official say they are not contemplating the privatization of child care.

Kent Olsen asserted that privatizing the school-aged child care program (SAC) would lead to inconsistency in staffing. He contended that the director of community education and recreation, Sara Aeschbach, had turned in a budget that she knew was not balanced, and questioned how such a budget could be used to cut staff. Olsen contended that the privatization of SAC had been kept quiet by the board possibly because it wanted to prevent a loss of trust on the part of AAPS parents who use the program. Olsen said SAC staff wants to work with the community and the board to address their budget, and thanked the trustees for their time and “serious consideration” of his concerns.

Connie Devine, a child care supervisor, then spoke, saying that she opposed the privatization of child care. She argued that the child care staff has been greatly overlooked, and that they have been given no opportunity to negotiate.

Finally, a Dicken Elementary School parent spoke. She said that, as a working parent, she chose AAPS in part because of KCare’s reputation as high-quality child care, and expressed concern that the quality would suffer if the service was privatized.

After the meeting, The Chronicle spoke with Roberts and Mexicotte about these public comments. They confirmed that, though there had been some consideration of privatizing child care services, there are no plans to do so at this time. Mexicotte added that such a move would have to be a part of the budget discussion, which it was not.

Public Commentary – Thurston Driveway Project

Kathy Griswold spoke again regarding her concerns about the paving project to be completed this summer at Thurston Elementary School. Saying that the Transportation Safety Committee had met the day before, she requested that the board “issue a change order” to fix a significant vehicle-pedestrian conflict. This design was a compromise, she said. It is better, but not good, Griswold continued, and “we cannot compromise on student safety.” Lastly, Griswold argued, the design is ugly, too expensive, and will have a negative impact on future sinking fund campaigns.

In response to Griswold’s attempts to revise the paving project, on Friday, June 11, Thurston’s principal Patricia Manley issued a statement via email on behalf of the Thurston community stating that she believed that the design they had was the one they wanted. Manley included a .pdf attachment with a memorandum from Brad Mellor, who chairs the transportation safety committee. [The email exchanges between Griswold and school officials last week provide additional background on the Thurston driveway project.]

Public Commentary – Advice from Thomas Partridge

Thomas Partridge frequently speaks at public commentary of other Ann Arbor public bodies, such as the city council, the county board of commissioners and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board. At Wednesday’s AAPS meeting, he introduced himself as “Thomas Partridge, AAPS resident, father, grandfather, and advocate for the most vulnerable.” He said he supported the consolidation of transportation services, but urged the board to “keep as many jobs as possible.”

Partridge then went on to other topics, suggesting that AAPS transfer money and attention away from competitive sports and toward music. He stated that he supports increased funding for education, and is an opponent of the “tea-baggers.”Partridge asserted, “Freedom does not come from cutting out opportunity,” and argued that “we need true reform.”

First Briefing Items

The board heard three items at first briefing, meaning they were introduced, and will be placed on the agenda for a second briefing and vote at the next regular meeting on June 23. The board considered renewing its food service contract, as well as its membership in the Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA). Trustees also discussed the degree to which pilot programs in the district need to be monitored by the board, as reflected by board policy.

Food Service Contract Renewal

Allen presented a resolution asking the board to approve another year of food service provided by Chartwells School Dining Services. He explained that the board approved a five-year contract with yearly renewal requirements in 2009, and this is the first of the four annual renewal requests.

Both Lightfoot and Baskett asked about the feedback on Chartwells’ services received from parents and students, as well as the process for incorporating that feedback. Allen noted the existence of a districtwide committee on nutrition, but allowed, “I still think the [parent] survey needs some work.” The chief complaint he received about the food, he said, was the menu repetitiveness, which repeats on a 30-day cycle. Student feedback, Allen said, comes chiefly by tracking the number of meals purchased.

Baskett noted that national concern about childhood obesity is growing, and Lightfoot questioned food quality, noting that she has heard complaints regarding an overabundance of carbs, or starches. She also stated that, for parents, “There is no mechanism by which they can make actual change.”

Allen countered that many of AAPS menu choices exceed government requirements set by the USDA, and pointed out that AAPS menus include whole wheat options, and an increased presence of fruits and vegetables. The constraints on further improving the menu are cost-related, he said. Allen continued, “If we want to provide filet mignon, [Chartwells] will do it, but they will charge us.” Lightfoot suggested that savings earned by outsourcing food service could be redirected back into the program to increase the quality of the food, and Allen said that could be considered.

Baskett asked how programmatic changes, such as price increases, would be communicated to parents. Allen noted that no price increases are planned for next year, and added that all families with students in the lunch program receive a letter regarding the program over the summer.

Allen also noted that Chartwells’ annual evaluation by AAPS will take place in July. Thomas questioned whether the review would be financial or regarding customer satisfaction. Allen answered that it will be both – finances will be reviewed, but also complaints or concerns brought by AAPS.

Baskett asked how well the Chartwells food service program had done at increasing the number of students receiving free and reduced lunch, which had been one of the goals in hiring the company. Allen replied that the numbers of applications for free and reduced lunch has been rising steadily for the last two years, and that he would be able to bring back those statistics to the board after the July review.

Mexicotte suggested that it would be helpful if the renewal process could be tied to the evaluation process by having AAPS be proactive in surveying, rather than waiting for the end-of-the-year report from Chartwells. She requested that Allen look at using surveys to assess customer satisfaction with the food service program on a regular basis.

MHSAA Membership Renewal

Roberts introduced the MHSAA membership renewal resolution, which would commit AAPS to comply with all MHSAA regulations in exchange for being allowed to participate in post-season play. He noted that this renewal is required annually by Aug. 1, that there was nothing new to the resolution that the board has not approved in previous years, and that there was no cost associated with the membership.

Stead noted that it was exciting to see Skyline High School listed as a member school.

Pilot Projects and Other Policy Considerations

The board was asked to temporarily reauthorize four board policies – two reviewed by the performance committee (4300 & 7220), and two reviewed by the planning committee (3760 & 6120) – with no changes until the end of the calendar year. Committee chairs Baskett and Patalan stated in memos to the board that the extensions would allow “further administrative/committee review” of the policies.

Policy 4300 covers employee evaluation, and Baskett suggested that it would be important to see what happens with the federal Race to the Top legislation – which may cause changes to the evaluation system – before recommitting to the policy.

Policy 7220 covers parent and booster organizations. Baskett reported that the booster clubs operate differently at each school, and that no consensus has yet been reached among school staff regarding the policy, so the performance committee would like more time to work on it.

Policy 3760 covers transportation, which Patalan pointed out is in flux; therefore, her committee requested the extension to craft the policy in light of what happens with possible consolidation of services.

Policy 6120 requires board approval of all “pilot projects” in the district, and annual board evaluation of such projects for their first three years. Patalan said her committee had “done a lot of talking” about the policy, but that they were not ready to recommend a revision.

Mexicotte added some history to the board’s ongoing debate about the pilot project policy, beginning, “A million years ago, I wrote this policy to ensure that new ideas would have some level of accountability.” When it was originally drafted, she said, there were many programs with unclear effectiveness. Now, she said, the board is better apprised of new programs and how they align with the district’s curriculum, thanks to the current administration’s commitment to providing information. In addition, she said, fewer new initiatives have been labeled “pilot projects” in order to avoid the added oversight accompanying that designation. Mexicotte concluded, “I am okay with us undoing the need for this oversight … If the committee thinks it’s obsolete, I’m okay with it.”

Nelson pointed out that there are many new board members who may have new ideas, and that this topic has “a lot of nuances.” He argued that it deserves the “low-stakes” brainstorming that occurs in committees, and suggested that both the performance and planning committees review the policy in the fall.

Thomas added, “I don’t think the need for this policy has gone away.” In a reference to the disbanding of a lunch program at Dicken Elementary School aimed at raising the test scores of African American students, Thomas argued, “The district recently experienced the effects of a ‘pilot project’ that did not go well.” He suggested focusing on better adherence to the policy as written.

Roberts resisted, saying that for the board to monitor every program at every school would be too time-consuming. He asked what the policy would label a “pilot project.”

Lightfoot agreed with Thomas, saying that the policy is fitting, and that she is still astounded at the number of programs in the district. “I understand how time-consuming it would be to lay that all out, but we need that,” she said. “There is room to improve on getting a handle on all the programs going on at all the schools … The program at Dicken is an example of exactly what we need to be aware of.”

Mexicotte jumped in, “Just for the record, I think this is a beautifully written policy.”

Baskett – who had also aided in the original drafting of the policy – concurred, smiling, “I, for one, don’t want to change a word.” More seriously, she said she would, however, like better adherence to the policy, and pointed out that a participant at the recent achievement gap meeting at Mitchell Elementary asked for an inventory of district initiatives on that topic, but that she and Lightfoot, who were chairing that meeting, “didn’t know where the master list was.”

Association Reports

The board invites the Youth Senate, the Black Parents Student Support Group (BPSSG), the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee on Special Education (AAPAC), the Parent-Teacher-Organization Council (PTOC), the Ann Arbor Administrators Association (AAAA), and the Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA) to offer regular reports at its meetings. At this meeting, the board heard reports from the Youth Senate, the AAPAC, and the PTOC.

Youth Senate

Youth senators suggested aligning the Pioneer High School bus schedule with its media center hours, so that students who arrive early on the bus can consistently use the media center before school. They also expressed concern about the new math graduation requirements, and the Skyline High School final exam schedule, which does not include a half day off for studying like the schedules at Pioneer, Huron, and Community high schools do.

Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee Report

Ann Telfer reported for the AAPAC. She stated some concerns regarding the high turnover of speech pathologists at Huron High as an example of “ancillary services” that she argued could use more oversight at the central and building levels. Teacher consultants, she said, should be able to report any gap in service delivery directly to parents.

Telfer also noted a trend in AAPS, in which graduating seniors from the special education program cannot pass the COMPASS test at Washtenaw Community College, which is used to determine academic placement. The AAPAC would like to be invited to discuss the “false sense of academic achievement” given to AAPS students with IEP or 504 plans, as well as how the personal curriculum option could be used for these students. The AAPAC is also looking forward to being part of the hiring process for a new director of student intervention and support services, Telfer said, and gave the retiring Larry Simpson best wishes.

PTO Council Report

Bill Ebright reported for the PTOC, saying that they filled their officer slate for 2010-11, and that the PTOC advocacy has begun a postcard campaign to keep pressure on the state legislature to ensure adequate school funding.

Special Presentations

In addition to the Skyline High School update, which The Chronicle intends to report on side-by-side with the other high school updates coming later this month, the board heard two special presentations about programs that operate in the district: USA Hockey, and the Intergroup/Social Change Agents. Both were given solely for the board’s information, and required no action.

USA Hockey

Pioneer High athletic director Lorin Cartwright introduced the USA Hockey National Team Development Program (NTDP), which is housed at the school. The NTDP is a program to develop national hockey players under the age of 18. Roberts explained that these 44 players come mostly from outside of AAPS, and make a two-year commitment to the program. They enroll at Pioneer, and have earned an average GPA of 3.25, while performing local community service projects in addition to training as world-class athletes. Over 98% of the players leave the program with a college commitment.

Nelson and Patalan thanked the students for their hard work, and for inspiring AAPS students to do community service by their example. Cartwright summarized, “These are outstanding young men in an outstanding program housed in AAPS.”

Intergroup/Social Change Agents

Naomi Warren, a research assistant at the University of Michigan’s Program on Intergroup Relations, introduced the Intergroup/Social Change Agents (Intergroup) program to the board as “a program to help students learn how to talk across difference.” It has been a part of AAPS for eight years, she said. Warren thanked the board for its support.

A recent Huron High School graduate described how the program had taught her to listen from her heart, and to dialogue rather than debate when it came to issues of social identity. Another student said a joint workshop with students from Huron and Stone schools helped them to break down stereotypes held by the students at those schools regarding each other. And a third student asserted that Intergroup had taught him how to understand others’ points of view.

Mikel Brown, who co-facilitates Intergroup along with Warren, explained that the program helps kids to understand and manage conflict. “You can be a bunch of pieces of a puzzle in one box and make no sense at all,” Brown said, “or, you can figure out how you’re supposed to fit together with other people.”

Stead thanked the three students who spoke, affirming that the ability to listen really is a life skill.

Nelson said he appreciated the work of Intergroup, adding that it’s a good reminder of what’s important beyond the academic core.

Baskett asked how the program is funded, and how students can get involved.

Warren explained that funding was piecemeal – AAPS pays a portion as a stipend to a school liaison, and the program is partly supported by Dr. Michael Spencer at the UM School of Social Work and outside grants. Currently, Brown added, the program takes place at Huron and Stone schools, and meets after school. He said it’s been a challenge to make the program more mainstream, but that he wants it to move forward and have more impact, noting that prevention is a cost-effective means of preventing more harmful conflict in the future.

Lightfoot thanked the Intergroup presenters for coming, and asked that they “stay in touch with us. We too are in conflict, so we can be in conflict together.”

Awards and Accolades

The board typically recognizes a variety of organizations and individuals at each meeting for a range of different awards and achievements.

Kiwanis Club Scholarships

Ann Mattson, president of the Kiwanis Club of Ann Arbor, made a special presentation to the board to report on its scholarship program. This year, Mattson said, Kiwanis awarded 29 $1,000 scholarships to AAPS students, funded primarily by the thrift sale it runs on Saturdays. Mattson also mentioned that six students from AAPS middle schools were given scholarships to attend music camp this summer.

Mexicotte thanked Mattson and Kiwanis for their support of AAPS students.

Superintendent’s Report

Roberts issued congratulations to all 2010 graduates. He also thanked the 450 parent volunteers who made the elementary Science Olympiad possible, and noted many awards earned by AAPS students and staff, including Atulya Shetty, a Clague Middle School 8th grader who will represent the U.S. in the World Youth Chess Championship.

Items from the Board

Lightfoot mentioned that she and Thomas had attended another board member training by the Michigan Association of School Boards that was “fabulous.” She also mentioned visiting Thurston Elementary,  how excited they are about getting their new driveway, and how retiring Lakewood principal Rick O’Neill will be a real loss to the district. Lastly, Lightfoot thanked participants of a recent meeting held at Mitchell Elementary to discuss the achievement gap, saying that many have asked for that dialogue to continue. She also reported that many board members have expressed a willingness to formalize work on the achievement gap.

Baskett reported that she has visited three of the five middle school planning centers, and suggested, “We need to put some consistency around these.” When asked by The Chronicle after the meeting what her purpose was in visiting the planning centers when they are being eliminated in place of the new “positive behavioral support” initiative beginning next year, Baskett responded that she is interested in collecting baseline impressions of the centers before the transition.

Agenda Planning

Neither the performance nor planning committee made reports at this meeting, other than to invite the public to their final meetings of the year. The performance committee met on June 10, and the planning committee will meet on Wednesday, June 16 at 6:30 p.m. in the superintendent’s conference room at the Balas Administration Building, 2555 S. State St. After the meeting, Lightfoot said the planning committee will consider how the board should move forward in supporting work on closing the achievement gap among students of different races.

Nelson announced that he and Patalan, the only two board members not up for re-election in November, would be holding an information session for prospective board members on Wednesday, June 30 at 5:30 p.m. at the Balas Administration Building.

Mexicotte announced that the board would meet for a full-day retreat on Friday, July 23.

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

Next regular meeting (and the last one of the 2009-10 school year): June 23, 2010, 7 p.m., at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 4th floor board room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

AAPS Superintendent Todd Roberts, flanked by members of his staff, begins presenting his administration's proposed 2010-11 district budget. Behind him, from left to right, are two members of his cabinet: Robert Allen and Randy Trent, and the three administrators of instructional services: Lee Ann Dickinson-Kelley, Larry Simpson, and Joyce Hunter. (Photos by the writer.)

However, multiple budget factors are still unknown: the state has not yet set the per-pupil funding amounts for next year; contract negotiations between AAPS and its teachers, bus drivers, and custodial/maintenance workers unions are still ongoing; and a possible countywide transportation consolidation plan is in the works, but has not yet been solidified. Depending on these outcomes, an additional 39 teaching and three administrative positions could be eliminated, and support services could still be outsourced. If layoffs are made, teachers will be notified by the end of April.

Though the board will hear an update on the proposed budget from the administration on April 14, board president Deb Mexicotte described that second briefing as a time when the board is “looking to have a general consent that this is the direction we are going, with the idea that we have legal obligations related to the budget that we are approving in June.” Two public forums are set for April 12 and 13, and a public hearing on the budget will be held before the board in late May. The district’s fiscal year begins July 1, 2010.

Wednesday’s meeting also covered a variety of other business: the second quarter financial report; a discussion regarding the necessity of maintaining the district’s fund balance; unanimous approval by the six trustees present to welcome “schools of choice” students to the district; and a special briefing which expedited the district’s ability to lease antenna space on the top of three district buildings to a wireless broadband Internet service provider.

2010-11 AAPS Budget Proposal

Roberts began his budget presentation by explaining that this year the budget process started earlier than usual, because of the complicated and uncertain funding scenarios that face the district. He reviewed how his administration had begun looking at ways to find savings last November, brought information to four budget forums in January, collected ideas from the community at those forums, and then returned to work at the district level. He thanked the many forum participants, as well as those who took the district’s online survey.

Roberts had given a preview presentation of the proposed budget to all AAPS staff on Wednesday afternoon, so many of the speakers during the first two hours of the meeting – before the budget presentation – made reference to various specifics of the proposal. In general, administration and board members referred to the budget proposal as having two parts – some called them part one and part two, while others referred to plan A and plan B.

The part one/plan A terminology refers to the vast majority of proposed cuts and new revenue options, resulting in a total budget reduction of $15.9 million. This core proposal would come close to balancing the 2010-11 budget (leaving a deficit of only $550,000), if there are no additional cuts to the state foundation allowance for the next school year.

However, because the state’s budget is not yet set, and because it is anticipated that the state may cut the school aid budget by an additional $200-$300 per pupil, AAPS administration has also put forth a second, complementary plan – part two/plan B – outlining an additional $4.1 million to $4.5 million in reductions that would be necessary to ensure a balanced budget regardless of what the Michigan legislature does.

This article organizes the budget presentation, interspersed with board members’ questions and comments, into the following main sections. First, there are seven sections on the core proposal: (i) how the AAPS budget is funded and allocated; (ii) proposed budget reductions to district-wide, non-instructional support services; (iii) proposed budget reductions to district-wide, instructional support services; (iv) proposed budget reductions to elementary programming; (v) proposed budget reductions to middle school programming; (vi) proposed budget reductions to high school programming; and (vii) proposed district-wide general savings and increased revenue. The budget reporting concludes with a separate section on additional options that were presented for addressing the remaining $4.4 million projected deficit.

2010-11 Budget: How the AAPS Budget Is Funded and Allocated

Robert Allen, AAPS deputy superintendent of operations (and chief financial officer), began by defining the foundation allowance as the per-pupil funding received from the state of Michigan. He then defined the blended membership count – the number of pupils in a district eligible for the foundation allowance. The blended count is determined by adding 25% of the student count in February of one school year to 75% of the student count in September of the following school year. Allen also explained how the recent loss of “20j” funding has resulted in a decrease in the AAPS foundation allowance – down to $9,490 per pupil.

Enrollment in the district has been declining since 2006-07, said Allen, and part of the proposed budget plan is to increase enrollment. He pointed out that the loss of funding expected in 2010-11 would take the foundation allowance back to 2001-02 levels, resulting in a roughly $20 million deficit for the coming year.

Allen then gave a brief overview of how AAPS spends its money. The majority of the general fund budget (82%) is spent on instruction and instructional support. The rest is spent on operations and maintenance (10%), transportation (4%), and central administration (4%). Allen echoed his refrain from the community budget forums: “The driving cost in our district is people.”

Before walking the board through three possible budget scenarios, Allen enumerated the assumptions underlying his revenue and expenditure projections. The projections assume:

• an enrollment increase of approximately 200 students;
• flat state funding or a decrease by as much as $300 per pupil;
• a slight decrease in interest income;
• a slight increase in local funding sources;
• an increase of 8% in health benefits over the next three years;
• an increase in the employer retirement contribution from 16.94% to 19.41%; and
• wage increases based on negotiated settlements.

Therefore, Allen stated, without budget reductions, if the state foundation allowance is kept constant, AAPS would end up with a $15.4 million deficit for the 2010-11 school year. If per-pupil funding is cut by $200 per pupil, Allen projects a $18.7 million deficit. And, he said, a $300 per-pupil cut would lead the district to the worst-case scenario: a $20 million shortfall.

Allen also walked the board through the details of that shortfall’s impact on the fund equity balance. This year, the opening balance in fund equity was $27 million, but nearly $5 million of that will need to be used by the end of this fiscal year to make up for mid-year reductions in state funding. That means the fund will open the 2010-11 year with a balance of $22 million.

If the district did nothing to reduce costs, it would need to spend its fund equity down almost completely next year. According to Allen, that would cause a number of cash flow and other problems for the district. [A longer discussion on the effects of spending down the equity, or "rainy day fund" took place during Allen's presentation at this meeting of the second quarter financial update, reported later in this article.]

Roberts then stepped to the podium. Before inviting administration officials to begin listing proposed cuts, Roberts highlighted the guiding principles that had been considered when developing the budget: that any changes were aligned with the district’s strategic plan; that a focus on academic excellence was maintained; that the district continued to offer a variety of programs, even if they were provided differently; that new revenue was sought instead of just cost reductions; and that non-instructional and administrative functions would be cut before cuts would impact instruction.

2010-11 Budget: Proposed Cuts to Non-Instructional Support

Allen, joined by Randy Trent, AAPS executive director of physical properties, then enumerated the following proposed budget reductions, totaling $4.4 million:

• Eliminate the facilities renovation support, emergency management coordinator, and, through attrition, two clerical positions ($340,000);
• Better educate staff on energy savings strategies, and better monitor building energy usage ($400,000);
• Reduce pool usage at middle schools, including designating two pools for year-round community use ($100,000);
• Reduce transportation costs by consolidating with WISD, modifying the contract held with current employees, or outsourcing services ($1.5 million);
• Reduce custodial and maintenance costs either by modifying the contract held with current employees or outsourcing services ($2 million); and
• Reducing services for contracted maintenance services ($100,000).

Allen added that, in terms of transportation services, the preferred option is consolidating services with other districts in the county, which would save 20-25% of the cost of services. In a follow-up call with The Chronicle, AAPS director of communications, Liz Margolis, confirmed that the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD) transportation consolidation plan is “looking hopeful,” and that it could be implemented as soon as next fall. She explained that, if the plan comes to fruition, most if not all AAPS bus drivers would become WISD employees, and would remain in the state retirement system. Initially, parents in Ann Arbor would notice little difference in service at all, she said.

Margolis added that in April, the WISD will host a meeting of board members from all 10 districts in the county to explain the plan and gauge support. The WISD has been working with an outside consultant, and routers from interested districts have been involved in the planning process. At this point, Margolis said, at least five of the districts – Ypsilanti, Willow Run, Lincoln, Saline, and AAPS – are interested, and that may be enough to make the program work. Lastly, she added, the state has been pushing districts to find ways to consolidate services, so this transportation consolidation would meet that directive. A final decision is expected to be made on the possible countywide consolidation of school transportation services by mid-May, “a best-case scenario,” according to Margolis.

Margolis also updated The Chronicle on a recent meeting between AAPS and AATA in which the creation of a pilot program for high school students was discussed. The details of how the pilot program would work are still being figured out, but one possibility is that AAPS high school students within 1/4 mile of AATA bus services would be given a choice to either ride the AAPS bus to school, or receive a smart card allowing them unlimited weekday access to the AATA buses. Students choosing to ride the AATA buses to school would pay with their smart cards, allowing AATA to track each ride, and charge AAPS accordingly. Margolis stressed that the plan was still evolving, but that she was “very hopeful” it would be piloted next fall.

2010-11 Budget: Proposed Cuts to Instructional Support

Roberts, along with Lee-Ann Dickinson-Kelley, AAPS administrator for elementary education, presented the following proposed reductions to the budget for instructional support services, totaling $3.5 million:

• In special education services, eliminate 2.5 administrative positions, 10 paraprofessional positions, and eight teaching positions, such as school psychologists or social workers, in order to better align with contractual caseload limits ($575,000);
• In central administration, eliminate five positions, and add an administrator for curriculum and instruction ($390,000);
• Reduce textbook budgets by half, by moving from a five-year to a seven-year replacement cycle ($200,000);
• Reduce discretionary budgets, though with a more generous allowance given to elementary programming, since it uses more consumables ($400,000);
• Modify the delivery model for English as a second language (ESL) services, eliminating 3.5 staff positions, and assigning 75 ESL students per ESL teacher, as per their contract ($315,000);
• Reduce contract services for delivering professional development ($200,000);
• Limit district-funded conference attendance, and substitutes for professional development and clerical positions ($450,000);
• Reduce the general fund contribution to middle and high school extracurricular activities and athletics, including instituting pay-to-participate athletics, consolidating some sports teams between schools, and instituting a musical instrument rental/maintenance fee ($1.07 million).

Regarding the modification of ESL services, Dickinson-Kelley explained that part of the reorganization would include increasing professional development services so that all teachers would be better able to meet the needs of English-language learners. Dickinson-Kelley said that the Read 180 program employed in grades 3-12 throughout the district has been shown to be effective with many learners, including ESL students. She said the district is also considering dual-language immersion classes as part of the revised approach to meeting the needs of ESL students. Trustee Simone Lightfoot asked about the number of eliminated positions that would result in layoffs, and Dickinson-Kelley responded that though there were some retirements, she could not guarantee that no personnel would be laid off. She is trying to consolidate across schools, and just collapse positions into each other.

The curriculum and instruction administrator position was one that the district previously had, but it has remained unfilled in recent years. Trustee Christine Stead asked who had been covering the responsibilities of the position in the meantime, and Roberts answered, “Ostensibly, I’ve been in that role, which was my background before coming to this position.” He added that leaving the position unfilled initially was the right decision for the district, but that “it is an important position to have in the district going forward.”

Roberts also acknowledged the extra responsibilities assumed by Dickinson-Kelley, as well as by Joyce Hunter, administrator for middle and high school education/director of career and technical education, and Larry Simpson, administrator for student intervention and support services (special education). Roberts added that in some ways, the lack of a supervisor has been very helpful, since Simpson, Dickinson-Kelley, and Hunter had to work more closely to get their jobs done.

Board president Deb Mexicotte said she was pleased that the administration had found a way to reestablish the instruction administrator position. Irene Patalan, the board’s vice president, thanked the superintendent, as well as the current administrators, saying they “really did take on more than expected because it needed to be done.”

Lightfoot asked about the salary range for the additional position, and Roberts answered that it was set at $117,000. Also in response to a question from Lightfoot, Roberts said that all but one of the five central administration positions being reduced by attrition are due to retirements.

There was a lengthy discussion regarding the proposal to charge summer school tuition. Trustee Susan Baskett noted she had a lot of concern about this idea. She asked what the average elementary tuition would be, and how the process would work for getting a scholarship to attend. In response, Dickinson-Kelley asserted that summer school is a high priority for her, as a means for students to increase their skillfulness and prevent regression. A four-week session would cost $200, she said, which was determined in part by looking at Rec & Ed fees.

Dickinson-Kelley then outlined the summer school scholarship application process as follows. Teachers make recommendations, which go straight to the central office. Working with food service directly, the central office will stamp “paid” directly on application forms for families receiving free or reduced lunch. Dickinson-Kelley said that principals would counsel eligible families to sign up for the free and reduced lunch program, and that she saw many “compassionate conversations” occurring.

Mexicotte was unconvinced, saying she was “very troubled about charging tuition for the [AAPS] summer school program,” and that the district strongly needed to consider “the amount of savings we get versus the potential harm to student achievement.”

Board secretary Glenn Nelson, too, expressed concern about charging for the summer program. Citing global warming, mass dislocations of people, and the debt crisis, he asserted that children need the best education possible because the world is “getting harder.” He noted the care put into this proposal by administration, but concluded that the bottom line was that the investment in education was decreasing: “This in my mind is a bad thing for the children of our community, and what it does to their future.”

Roberts emphasized that it was a goal for extracurricular activities not to prevent any student from participating. The cost to participate in high school sports would be $150 for the first sport, and $50 for every sport thereafter. In middle school, there would simply be one $50 athletic fee for any number of sports played over one year. Scholarships would be available, he said, for athletics, as well as to cover the musical instrument fees. Roberts also pointed out that students had already been paying $50 to keep instruments over the summer, and that this would extend the fee to the whole year.

Baskett confirmed that extracurricular funding comes from the district’s general fund, not the school booster clubs, and that instrument rental begins in the fifth grade, when every student studies instrumental music. Mexicotte commented that she was uncomfortable with charging a fee for musical instrument rental, pointing out that “music is ‘extra’ neither for our curricular needs nor for our graduation requirements,” and saying that it reminded her of a previous debate over funding graphing calculators.

2010-11 Budget: Proposed Reductions to Elementary Programming

Dickinson-Kelley proposed the following reductions to elementary programming, totaling $910,000:

• Restructure the elementary “specials” to maintain art, music, and physical education experiences, while better emphasizing the acquisition of technology skills, adding a humanities strand, and eliminating nine media specialist positions ($810,000); and
• Reduce teacher clerk hours by aligning to contractual obligations ($100,000).

Dickinson-Kelley then outlined the revamped elementary specials program as it’s proposed. First, she said, all students will continue to receive the “threshold” experience each week of: a 60-minute art class; two periods of vocal music; two periods of physical education (PE); two periods of information literacy and technology (ILT); and instrumental music (fifth grade only).

What would be new, Dickinson-Kelley continued, is aligning the ILT special with statewide Michigan Education Technology Standards (METS), and adding a humanities strand for kindergarten through fifth grade. According to Dickinson-Kelley, that alignment would embed the application of technology skills in social studies and science lessons.

Dickinson-Kelley described the new humanities strand as “a deliberate series of interdisciplinary lessons … taught by specials teachers that align with the [Grade-Level Content Expectations] GLCEs.” Some examples she gave included: lessons on sound taught by music teachers, art teachers teaching students how to draw in science journals, and concepts of force and motion being applied in physical education class.

Dickinson-Kelley described “the new 3 Rs … [as] rigor, relevance, and relationships,” and argued that “embedded learning” would benefit students tremendously. By keeping special areas teachers more involved, she said, students gain knowledge by having concepts reinforced from different perspectives, and by different instructors. She also pointed out that, with the exception of the addition of world languages, there have not been any changes to the elementary “special areas menu” in 40 years.

Patalan asked how far along in development the humanities strand was. Dickinson-Kelley explained that it was not a new concept for music and art teachers, and that PE teachers were having meetings about it. The only part that would be new to media specialists, she said, was aligning the technology outcomes they already teach to specific science and social studies GLCEs. She added that humanities increases the relevance of core concepts by highlighting their application in the arts. Patalan called the plans “joyful.”

Baskett concurred saying, “If this is what I think it is, it sounds wonderful,” and got confirmation that humanities would begin in the fall. Nelson expressed how he thought the addition of this new strand was an example of the cumulative nature of the district’s educational goals, saying “one doesn’t start with freshmen and produce excellence.” Mexicotte noted that while the restructured program is “excellent … it does come with a cost.” She also asked Dickinson-Kelley to put up a Q&A about the humanities strand to stem the flow of questions from parents about what will be offered, and Dickinson-Kelley agreed to do that.

Lightfoot questioned how many layoffs would be caused by eliminating the nine media specialist positions. Dickinson-Kelley answered that some layoffs would need to occur, as some media specialist positions would now be shared between smaller schools.

Roberts emphasized that eliminating positions does not translate directly to laying off people. At least some of the positions will vanish through attrition, he said, but there is no way to know at this point how many retirements there will be, nor how many of the remaining teachers have multiple certifications that would allow them to transfer to other open positions.

As an example, a teacher in an eliminated ESL or media specialist position could be reassigned to teach another subject for which he or she is highly qualified, such as English or a world language. Seniority also plays a part in teacher assignments and voluntary transfers, as teachers move to fill open positions.

In response to further questioning by Lightfoot, Roberts explained that the administration has some legal timelines it must meet regarding layoffs. All teachers facing potential layoffs need to be notified by the end of April, he said, and could then be called back if possible. Roberts added that he hopes to be able to confirm the number of layoff notices that will need to be issued at the next board meeting on April 14.

2010-11 Budget: Proposed Reductions to Middle School Programming

Joyce Hunter, AAPS administrator for middle and high school education, then came to the podium. She mentioned that there had been over 22 meetings with people affected by the changes, and then proposed the following reductions to middle school programming, totaling $928,000:

• Eliminate 8.2 teaching positions by increasing class sizes in electives, but keeping core class sizes averaging 28 students ($738,000); and
• Eliminate 3.4 teaching positions by staffing middle school planning centers instead with trained, non-teaching staff ($190,000).

Trustee Christine Stead asked for examples of elective classes that would be affected by the increase in class sizes, and why the core class sizes would be kept lower than the range in the contract. Hunter answered that some individual electives would need be cut to increase class sizes in others, but that no entire program would be wiped out, even if enrollment was low. Hunter also pointed out that the maximum class size allowable by the contract is 33, but that it was strongly preferred that the average core class size would be lower.

Trustee Susan Baskett prompted Hunter to explain the current role and staffing of the middle school planning centers. Hunter explained that the planning centers are used to work with students in terms of discipline, mediation, and conflict management. She also added that the five centers (one at each middle school) are better aligned now than in the past – all use the same central database, and have a common brochure that explains their services. The reduction would be only 3.4 FTEs because Tappan is already using a paraprofessional instead of a teacher to staff its planning center.

Baskett, Simone Lightfoot, and Deb Mexicotte each questioned the need for maintaining the planning centers at all. Baskett pointed out that paraprofessionals staffing the centers might not be qualified to help students with the lessons they are missing, and that when she came on the board seven years ago, some students at that time were calling the planning centers “blacks incarcerated centers.” Baskett concluded, “I think it’s time to look at getting rid of these things.” Lightfoot asked how hiring new people to staff the centers would save any money, and mentioned that the counselors are also available for conflict resolution. She, too, asked, “What about doing away with them all together?”

Mexicotte echoed these sentiments, and provided some history. She said the board had looked extensively at the planning centers over 10 years ago, when they were viewed solely as “disciplinary dumping grounds.” Back then, a decision was made to staff them with certified teachers in the hopes of increasing their effectiveness. In deciding to remove teachers from the planning centers, Mexicotte argued, “we are now moving back to the model that was seen as less good.”

Stating that she understood staff and principals’ needs for “something,” Mexicotte said that the mixed history of the planning centers led her to question if the district could find another way to meet the developmental and academic needs of these middle schoolers. She asked, “I can’t see that this is the best choice … What are our goals? Can we do this very differently?”

In response to the concerns stated by board members, Hunter mentioned that the principals did feel strongly that the planning centers be maintained, and that the hope would be that the district would receive enough applicants to staff them with qualified, certified, former teachers at a lower cost. Given the issues raised, Hunter said she would take the board’s concerns back and talk to the principals directly. She also agreed to collect feedback on the planning centers from parents and from school staff as a whole.

2010-11 Budget: Proposed Reductions to High School Programming

Hunter then continued with the high school portion of the proposed budget reductions, totaling $2.325 million:

• Eliminate two high school assistant principal positions ($260,000);
• Eliminate five teaching positions at the alternative high schools by reducing some electives and increasing class sizes ($450,000);
• Eliminate 11 teaching positions at the comprehensive high schools by reducing some electives, increasing class sizes, and providing less assistance for music classes ($990,000);
• Eliminate two counseling positions to better align student-counselor ratio ($180,000);
• Eliminate six clerical positions and lunchroom supervisors, having administrators and community assistants cover lunches ($320,000);
• Eliminate two community assistant positions ($80,000); and
• Reduce event security costs, such as police presence at certain athletic events ($45,000).

Stead asked how many of these staff reductions would take place through attrition, and Hunter answered that there would be some retirements, but also some layoffs.

Prompted by Baskett, Hunter defined the roles of the community assistants as follows – they monitor behavior in the halls and in the cafeteria, they assist with conflict resolution, and they also help during class time. Mexicotte suggested using community assistants instead of the student planning centers in middle school, since they are seen as such an asset at the high school level.

Lightfoot expressed concern that the community assistant positions “seem invaluable as it relates to discipline,” and said it greatly concerned her to reduce them. She said she would like to register her concern about losing the community assistants, who are the ones who “step in when other folks turn their heads.”

Baskett also asked about current event security costs and whether the district could get even more savings there. Roberts gave the example of Pioneer High School, saying outside security costs there were about $70,000 per year. You couldn’t eliminate that completely, he said, citing the importance, for example, of maintaining security at a Pioneer-Huron football game. Instead, he said, the reductions target those events that might not need an officer at all, or at least not two.

2010-11 Budget: District-Wide General Savings and Increased Revenue

Roberts pointed out some general savings the district anticipates, totaling $2.23 million:

• Savings built in to employee 2010-11 contracts ($1.2 million);
• Reduction in overtime costs, in part by passing the costs onto the activities/events occurring on the weekend, evening, or over the summer ($800,000);
• Savings by moving school board elections to November ($90,000); and
• Using Power School software to reduce printing and mailing costs ($140,000).

Also included in the budget plan, Roberts said, are the following new sources of revenue, totaling $1.648 million:

• Two additional cell antennas added to existing towers ($45,000);
• An increase in University of Michigan football game parking revenue ($75,000);
• Increased rental of school facilities and possible renting of school buses ($75,000);
• Providing management services for consolidated services in the county ($90,000);
• Increased enrollment of 20 students in the Options Magnet program ($135,000);
• Increased enrollment of 150 additional students through Schools of Choice ($780,000);
• Additional program support from the AAPS Education Foundation ($200,000); and
• Increasing enrollment at Roberto Clemente and Stone schools through cooperative agreements with other districts in the county ($248,000).

There was no discussion on the general savings or suggested revenue options.

2010-11 Budget: Options to Address the Remaining $4.4 million Deficit

Roberts then gave an overview of the proposed reductions to this point – the “core proposal” – resulting in $15.9 million in savings. Of the 80.6 positions proposed for elimination, 9.5 of them would be in administration, 50.1 would be teachers union members, nine would be office professionals, and 12 would be paraprofessionals. This, Roberts pointed out, was consistent with his stated goal at the beginning of this process to focus cuts on non-instructional and administrative functions instead of instructional services. The core reductions overall represent a 17% cut to administration and a 5.5% cut to instruction.

However, Roberts then placed the bulk of the remaining deficit of $4.4 million primarily on the teacher’s union to resolve. He explained that it was his hope that teachers would agree to reduce their salaries and benefits instead of cutting positions, but that if they would not, the administration would propose moving forward with the following reductions:

• Eliminate 14 elementary teaching positions, increasing average class sizes to 26, and increasing the number of split classes ($1.26 million);
• Eliminate eight middle school teaching positions by increasing class sizes ($720,000);
• Reduce or eliminate some middle school counselor positions ($270,000);
• Eliminate 14 high school teaching positions, including at the alternative high schools, by increasing class sizes, and reducing the number of elective sections ($1.26 million);
• Not add the Chief Academic Officer position, and eliminate a clerical position ($200,000);
• Eliminate two additional maintenance and custodial administrative positions ($160,000);
• Reduce supplemental pay, and eliminate some extracurricular paid positions ($180,000); and
• Further reduce substitutes for professional development ($100,000).

Roberts said that when he comes back to the board on April 14, a decision would have been made on covering the remaining $4.4 million deficit. He reminded the board of the district’s legal obligation to let teachers know by the end of April if they are being laid off, and said that by the next board meeting, “we’ll be closer to knowing how many layoff notices we may need to send.” In a follow-up phone interview,  district spokeswoman Liz Margolis confirmed the district’s position: “Unless something magical happens at the state, there is an anticipation that pink slips will be issued.”

Roberts also pointed out that one of the main issues affecting the outcome of negotiations between the AAPS administration and its teachers union is the effect of a possible increased employee contribution to the state retirement system. If teachers are forced to cover an additional 3% of their retirement costs, as Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s proposed budget suggests, they may be less willing to reduce their pay locally. Other legislation being considered – on health care, consolidation, and contract services – could also impact the budget, according to Roberts.

Nelson asked Robert Allen a question about his calculation of the base educational expenses in the budget scenarios, and Allen acknowledged that the estimates were conservative, and based on changes in the budgeting of capital needs. Nelson commented that he was “very comfortable” with this conservative approach, saying he agreed with the adage, “Don’t count your chickens before they’re hatched.”

Nelson also pointed out that a millage provided a large amount of the support for special education services. Roughly two-thirds of the $30 million needed for the district’s work with special education students is locally provided, Nelson said, thanking the local community for providing this support. He reminded the board that “these millages expire” and asserted, “We need to take responsibility locally – there is a big part of this that is under our control.”

Roberts closed by recognizing and thanking the work of his administration, the bargaining units, principals, and staff. He acknowledged, “It’s been a stressful time, for newer staff especially,” and assured the board and public that AAPS was committed to maintaining a high quality of education for all students.

Public Input in Strategic Planning on AAPS Proposed Budget

At the end of the budget presentation, Roberts commented that AAPS would continue to face funding challenges over the next few years, and invited all interested members of the community to participate in the next phase of the district’s strategic planning process, beginning in late April. After reviewing the plan and updating its goals, the strategic planning team will be forming action teams in May. These teams will then develop recommendations regarding the district’s programming, services, and facilities usage, and bring them to the board by December 2010.

Roberts also announced that the district would provide detailed budget information on its website, as well as hold two additional “budget forums” to review the proposed budget plan with the community before it comes to the board for a second briefing on April 14. On Thursday, these public meetings were announced on the AAPS website, along with a composite of the proposed budget numbers presented to the board, and FAQs about the proposed budget. The public budget presentations will be held on Monday, April 12, and Tuesday, April 13, in the Little Theaters of Pioneer and Huron respectively, and each begins at 6:30 p.m.

First Briefing: Second Quarter Financial Report and Fund Balance

Nancy Hoover, AAPS director of finance, began the second quarter financial report by requesting the board’s consideration of three resolutions: an amendment to the general fund; an amendment to the millage and capital needs fund; and approval of second-quarter disbursements. These resolutions, she explained, would make necessary adjustments to reflect changes in revenue and expenditures. Revenue to the general fund decreased overall by $2.7 million in the second quarter, as increases in some areas were offset by greater losses in other areas:

• Lower interest rates (-$250,000);
• Loss of 20j state funding (-$3.737 million);
• Lower enrollment than projected, resulting in a lower foundation allowance (-$470,000);
• An increase in Scio Township DDA excess capture (+$1 million);
• A transfer from the Millage and Capital Needs fund for textbook adoptions (+$500,000); and
• Receipt of 2004-07 Smart Zone capture from the City of Ann Arbor (+$200,000).

Hoover added, “When you look at the declining fund balance, less money earns less interest,” and noted that the AAPS finance team tries to be conservative in what it budgets, but was off this time. “We had thought it would come back,” she said, “but it did not.” Hoover also pointed out the following increases to general fund expenditures, totaling $1.8 million:

• An increase “due to the establishment of the budget for the transfer to the Millage and Capital Needs Fund,” which represents a change in accounting ($1.5 million); and
• An increase for textbook adoptions ($300,000).

Trustee Glenn Nelson asked if there was anything particularly significant at the state level that would cause a major shift in numbers in the third quarter. Hoover answered no, saying that the third quarter projections include the state of Michigan’s receipt of the second portion of state fiscal stabilization funds, and that there should be no impact on the fund balance.

Trustee Deb Mexicotte asked for clarification on the reason for the lower foundation allowance. Superintendent Todd Roberts confirmed that the lower amount of per-pupil funding received did not reflect a loss of 49 actual students, but rather 49 fewer than projected students: “There was a lower enrollment than had been projected.”

Nelson then mentioned how he had gone back and looked at the 2001-02 audit, which was the first he had reviewed as a board member. Per his review, he said, he calculated that state funding has dropped from 56% of the total AAPS budget to its current 42%, without even adjusting for inflation. Nelson argued, “This reinforces the point that we do need to be politically active at the state level.”

Trustee Susan Baskett noted that her committee was very grateful to Hoover in terms of her diligent attempts to acquire the Smart Zone money owed to the district.

Fund Balance Discussion

Allen then connected the second quarter’s losses to the effect on the district’s fund equity – or “rainy day fund,” as he acknowledged it is sometimes called. Allen began by showing a slide from the 2008-09 audit that broke down the fund equity by use. The majority of the fund balance (62%) is used to manage cash flow, primarily in the eight weeks a year when the district does not receive state aid payments, but must still issue paychecks. The remainder is designated as follows: 15% is for compensated absences; 7% will be used to make up the 2009-10 budget shortfall due to mid-year state funding reduction; 5% is saved for risk management expenses; 1% is reserved for inventory, or other expenses that cross fiscal years; and 10% is undesignated.

Allen expressed concern about using fund equity – as has been suggested by some bargaining units – as a way of covering the projected 2010-11 shortfall. He displayed a slide showing the district’s fund balances over the past six years, from $27,568,571 in 2004-05, up to $31,145,180 in 2007-08, and down to $19,400,000 for this year. He pointed out that the fund balance is supposed to be used for unforeseen things, such as roof repair that was not part of regularly scheduled maintenance. He also pointed out, “this year, when funding was cut mid-year, we did not have to do mid-year layoffs like other districts.” Roberts asserted that having fund equity “buys us time,” and had given the district choices to be able to weather the tumultuous changes in state funding.

Trustee Christine Stead asked if the $19.4 million fund equity balance shown for 2009-10 was what the district has right now, or if it was what was projected for the end of the fourth quarter. Allen said he expected the district would end the year with the balance at that amount. Nelson asked whether or not the current 2009-10 budget reduction plan would indeed save the $2.6 million it was intended to save, and Allen said it may be a challenge. “We continue to monitor that … There is a possibility we may not get there by the end of the year.” [The expected opening balance for the fund equity in 2010-11, as noted earlier in the article, is $22 million, and assumes the intended $2.6 million savings.]

If the mid-year budget reduction plan does not save as much as anticipated, the remainder will need to be taken from fund equity to balance the budget, along with the $4.9 million already being withdrawn this year. Though it is board policy not to allow the fund equity to drop below 15% of the overall budget, Allen acknowledged, “This year, we are going to be below that.”

Baskett asked how the retirement incentive being considered by the Michigan legislature would affect compensated absences, and how the new federal health care plan’s provision to allow coverage to minors up to age 26 would affect the district’s health care costs. Allen answered first that the district currently covers dependents through age 25, so it would cost one more year of coverage for those young adults. He then confirmed that the district’s current fund equity would be sufficient to cover any pay-outs resulting from an increase in retirements, but projected that many retirements would be rescinded if the legislation to increase the retirement multiplier does not pass.

Stead added that the federal health care legislation, passed that week, phases in over time, and that the district should expect some major changes by 2014. She argued that AAPS needs to be “very conservative” when it comes to health care, and warned that health care plans may increase rates up to 45%.

Nelson asked for confirmation that approximately $16.7 million of fund equity had been needed to cover cash flow in 2008-09, a number he had calculated roughly by taking 62% of the total fund balance. Allen agreed with Nelson’s calculation, and pointed out that the lower the fund equity balance, the higher the percentage needed to cover cash flow, such as summer payroll.

Patalan asked what would happen if the district couldn’t make payroll due to a fund equity shortfall. Allen explained that the state maintains a low-interest bond fund, and allows districts to borrow against their future state appropriations at a favorable interest rate. But, as Nelson had pointed out earlier, “those interest payments are true costs.” And, Allen, added, if a district borrows money to make payroll, the state considers it “insolvent” and requires it to submit a deficit reduction plan, losing some local control. Nelson concurred, pointing out two “sister districts” to AAPS that had a negative fund balance at the end of 2009. Nelson warned: “Study Willow Run and Ypsilanti to see what happens when you start out the year with a negative fund balance.”

First Briefing: Policy Updates

All board policies are periodically reviewed in a five-year cycle, according to board bylaw #1520, named “Sunset Provisions.” The administration is charged with reviewing the policies, and presenting any suggested changes to the planning committee. After planning committee review, the policy updates are brought to the board for review and adoption. Before the board on Wednesday was the first briefing of policy updates for review by the full board. These updates will be considered for adoption at the April 14 board meeting.

Irene Patalan, chair of the board’s planning committee, presented minor changes to seven policies, in order to better reflect procedures already in place in the district, and asked the board for any feedback.

Susan Baskett suggested standardizing references throughout the policies that refer to the position currently held by Robert Allen. It is sometimes referred to as “deputy superintendent of operations,” and other places called the “chief financial officer.”

Simone Lightfoot asked if bullying falls under the “safety, injuries, and emergencies” policy under review, and Todd Roberts answered that there is a separate bullying and harassment policy in the district. Lightfoot asked that the district’s bullying and harassment policy be reviewed, in light of a recent lawsuit in another district resulting in a large payout by the schools. She argued, “We need to be sure our policy is as current as it needs to be to prevent a revenue hit.” Patalan answered that her committee had been charged only with reviewing policies which were on the verge of expiring, but that it would add the bullying and harassment policy to its list of policies to be examined, given Lightfoot’s concern.

Deb Mexicotte asked board secretary Amy Osinski to list each policy separately on the consent agenda for the next meeting, in case a trustee would like to remove a single policy from it, and Osinski agreed.

Special Briefing: Cell Tower Leases

A special briefing is an item that is new to the board, but that eschews the first and second briefing process. It allows the board to take action on an item immediately.

Randy Trent, AAPS executive director of physical properties, made a short presentation, asking the board to approve the installment of three wireless broadband antennas on existing cell towers or chimneys, one each at the AAPS transportation building, Skyline High School, and Slauson Middle School. He explained that the lease with Clearwire Inc., an internet-service provider, would be for 20 years, and would bring in an additional $45,000 of revenue each year of the agreement, and a one-time $45,000 fee for improvements to these three buildings. Trent pointed out that increased revenue by leasing cell towers was a potential revenue source identified and encouraged by the community during the budget forum process.

Baskett challenged Trent on a number of fronts. First, she asked whether Trent had invited local residents to discuss the new antennas, and he confirmed that while he had invited all residents within 300 feet, only one family had shown up. Baskett then disputed many aspects of the proposed leases: their duration, their cost, and the timing of their approval.

Trent defended his proposal, arguing that it was beneficial for the district to lock a company into a 20-year lease, as “cell phone towers are going away … the market is decreasing.” Regarding the payment, Trent pointed out that the district’s contract gives companies a price break if they install multiple towers; it costs $25,000 for one tower, $20,000 each for two, and $15,000 each for three installations. He said that AAPS works with the companies to increase the number of sites, and asserted that the district is “very well-priced for the market.” Lastly, in terms of the timing, Trent maintained that market competition was the driving force behind asking for a quick turnaround: “If it takes three months to get through process with us, but 12 months with others, they come to us.”

Mexicotte supported Trent’s professional judgment about “what these companies like about [AAPS],” but Lightfoot also expressed concern about both the length of the lease and its price. She suggested that using “we’ve always done it that way” as a rationale was questionable and that AAPS should try to get as much as it can without chasing away clients.

Baskett asked that the lease agreement be moved off the consent agenda, and discussion on the item continued. When pressed by Mexicotte about whether she had any further questions for Trent, Baskett answered that no, she did not want to belabor it, but that she “didn’t hear a satisfactory answer.”

Stead and Nelson each expressed support for Trent’s proposal. Stead pointed out that getting requests each year to reduce contract prices – as Trent had described happening – proved to her that securing a longer lease seemed “fairly astute” on the part of AAPS administration. Nelson added that “we have our administration so busy right now,” that it’s not the right time to ask them to do further market research.

Baskett closed by saying that she was bothered by the inconsistency in process, and that she “would have expected the staff to do a little more homework.” Essentially, she said, she was looking for a second briefing.

Outcome: Approved. Nelson, Mexicotte, Lightfoot, Patalan, and Stead voted yes. Baskett voted no.

AAPS Now “Schools of Choice” for Washtenaw County

Superintendent Todd Roberts reviewed the Schools of Choice resolution with the board. If approved, he said, it would open 170 AAPS seats to students from other WISD districts. Applications would be accepted beginning April 1, through April 30. Trustee Glenn Nelson asked why the budget proposal only listed 150 seats, and Roberts confirmed that administration was being conservative in case there is less interest than anticipated from out-of-district families.

Trustee Irene Patalan asked for confirmation that the Schools of Choice program as presented was only a one-year program. Jane Landefeld, director of student accounting, confirmed that was correct. If it doesn’t work out, the district does not have to offer the program again, but any students already admitted will be able to continue in AAPS until graduation.

Patalan also asked what the effect would be if the majority of the open seats get filled with special education students. Landefeld reiterated that the district cannot discriminate in any kind of way, and that all the seats being filled with high-needs students was “a chance that we take.”

Landefeld argued that, overall, the program would still be a financial benefit, even if some students who enter AAPS cost more to educate than the foundation allowance they bring with them. Glenn Nelson added that special education students would bring additional state and county funding with them, and only a fraction of the additional costs would be borne by the district’s general fund: “The finances work fine, if that’s the root of the question.”

Outcome: The Schools of Choice proposal was passed unanimously by trustees as part of a consent agenda that also included approvals of meeting minutes and gift offers.

Public Commentary

In addition to members of the Skyline High School robotics team, described below, nine additional speakers contributed to public commentary, all opposing the district’s consideration of privatizing custodial and maintenance workers, from different angles.

AAPS custodians hold signs outside the AAPS board meeting on Wednesday night.

Two of the speakers were parents – one expressed appreciation of her daughter’s bus driver for bringing order to the bus. She also gave the example of how private workers would put more wear and tear on the buses, since they would not be as invested in their maintenance. The other parent mentioned that he was invited to the meeting by his daughter’s custodian, pointing to that as an example of the community ties that would be broken by privatization. He pleaded with the board to reconsider giving up their control over who is coming into contact with his kids.

The remaining seven speakers were either union staff or workers from the district service areas being considered for privatization. Their comments fell into two main categories: the state of collective bargaining between AAPS and the local custodial and maintenance workers union, and reasons not to privatize.

Public Commentary:  AAPS & Custodial/Maintenance Collective Bargaining

Custodial/maintenance staff and union officials spoke up regarding the current contract negotiation process between AAPS and their bargaining unit. They made several claims: that the district was being unreasonable in not working with them on the issue of using furlough days to save money; that the district did not furnish documents they had requested, which hampered their ability to find the savings necessary to preserve their jobs; that the district was being obstructionist in terms of not allowing access to board members; and that the district had not formed a quality assurance committee when it should have. Still, the closing note of one speaker was positive: “Hopefully, we can iron this out and continue to have a good working relationship.”

Public Commentary: Reasons Not to Privatize

Multiple speakers mentioned the lack of accountability shown by the board to the public on the issue of privatization, one asking, “Why is the board not listening to the public?” Another speaker praised AAPS parents for their “forceful rejection of privatization,” and accused the board of “defy[ing] the will of those they are entitled to represent.” Still a third speaker echoed this concern, arguing that the district had woefully misrepresented the views of community members regarding privatization expressed at the community forums, and saying that administrators were “ignoring public sentiment.”

Some speakers made personal appeals, saying they just could not afford higher benefits co-pays, and that the cuts being considered by the board would “lead some workers into poverty.” Instead,  it was suggested that the administration look at ways to decrease management costs instead of workers’ salaries and benefits.

Multiple speakers also referenced safety issues with outsourcing custodial, maintenance, and transportation workers. One suggested that if the board outsources, “[it] will have more problems than [it's] currently experiencing.” Another suggested that the responses to the RFP’s question on litigation by the two companies with bids under review by AAPS were paltry at best, deceptive at worst. The general message was: “If you choose to outsource, you are choosing to risk the safety of all of our kids.”

Association Reports

The board receives regular reports from the Youth Senate, the Black Parents Student Support Group (BPSSG), the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee on 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 and BPSSG did not report at this meeting.

Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee Report

Maria Huffman reported for the AAPAC, describing the disability awareness workshops as being “in full swing.” These workshops are an opportunity, she said, for fourth graders throughout the district to develop “an empathetic understanding of physical, developmental, and learning disabilities … [as well as to] spread the message that disability is a natural part of the diversity of all communities.” She also pointed out that this year is the first time AAPS has not had to rent the equipment to do these workshops, and thanked Steve Swartz for his work in making the workshops a success.

Also, Huffman announced that AAPAC would be presenting a free workshop to parents, staff, and caregivers about assistive technology (AT), and how some students could benefit from having an AT plan. The meeting will be Wednesday, March 31, at 7 p.m. at the WISD.

PTO Council Report

Martine Perreault, chair of the PTOC, used her report as an opportunity to praise parent involvement in the district, and to issue a call to action for all parents to educate themselves about school funding and consider joining the PTOC. Currently, the PTOC has representatives from 73% of the district’s PTOs and PTSOs, but the goal is 100%, she said.

Perreault then updated the board on the work of the PTOC’s newly-formed advocacy committee. The committee, she said, has developed talking points and identified priority groups to receive basic presentations on school funding, including all school PTOs, and community mothers’ groups. Perreault urged parents to get involved, join the advocacy committee by contacting Donna Lasinski at 734-997-7265 or by e-mail at ptoc.a2advocacy@gmail.com, and/or contact their legislators about securing stable school funding.

Ann Arbor Administrators Association Report

The AAAA representative began her report by concurring with AAPAC that the disability awareness workshops were a truly amazing experience for students. She then spoke “with mixed emotions” about the upcoming budget cuts, saying that plan A and plan B differ substantially. She applauded her colleagues who have had difficult conversations with their staffs, acknowledged the “tireless work” of the central administration, and valued Todd Roberts’ leadership.

Ann Arbor Education Association Report

Brit Satchwell, president of the AAPS teachers union, began by saying he was pleased at the increased political activism coming from the PTOC and the board: “I’m very encouraged that we’re starting to talk about increasing revenue – you fish where the fish are.”

Before continuing with his prepared comments, which were quite positive, Satchwell said, he wanted to comment on some of the public commentary heard from fellow union members. He suggested that the district dig deeper into fund equity, and then lead a united front to Lansing to look for longer-term solutions. He disagreed with asking people who are already at the bottom of the pay scale to give up their retirements, resubmitting the idea of “going to the well beyond your comfort level,” and acknowledging that while some fund equity can’t be touched, some of it can. He also asserted that he would poll his members, asking them how low they’re willing to go on pay and benefits.

Satchwell then picked up his prepared comments, saying that the AAEA and AAPS collective bargaining process has made progress, but has been hampered somewhat by uncertainties at the state. He thanked Roberts for giving his members a preview of the proposed budget, and credited Robert Allen, as well as AAPS assistant superintendent for human resources and legal services, Dave Comsa, and AAEA’s executive director Paul Morrison as being “creative thinkers, fair bargainers, and enjoy[ing] each other’s trust.” He said the downsizing that was necessary could be done “without major disruptions or draconian measures” and encouraged the board to maintain its political leadership, and “lead us to Lansing.”

Board Committee Reports

The board has two standing committees, where many items on the board’s agenda get a first look – performance and planning. Each board member except for the president is assigned to one or the other – Susan Baskett, Glenn Nelson, and Randy Friedman sit on the performance committee, and Irene Patalan, Christine Stead, and Simone Lightfoot sit on the planning committee. In their reports, both committee chairs – Baskett and Patalan – mentioned welcoming a large number of high school students to each of their most recent meetings. The students were there as a part of a class assignment. All performance and planning committee meetings are open to the public.

Performance Committee Activities

Baskett reported that the performance committee had reviewed the second quarter financial report [which was presented to the full board at Wednesday's meeting], as well as a series of policies that were sent back to administration to amend in light of Race to the Top legislation. The committee, she said, is also looking at a variety of issues: the potential impact of becoming a School of Choice on the children of non-resident employees currently attending school in the district; questioning the role of board members as political advocates, both individually and as a unit; and “reimagining” AAPS alternative programs.

Planning Committee Activities

Patalan noted that, in addition to reviewing the policy updates, and cell tower lease agreements, both of which are described earlier in this article, the planning committee had a conversation about how the new term “college and career-ready” could be helpful to the district.

Items from the Board

Baskett called for increased community activism, and support of the AAPS Education Foundation campaign being launched soon. She suggested, “All these elected officials in primaries should be asked what they are doing to stabilize education funding … Let’s keep the pressure on.”

Lightfoot reported on a community meeting she had attended the night before hosted by the Ann Arbor Citizens for Responsible School Spending (A2CRSS), which The Chronicle also attended. Lightfoot described A2CRSS as “the folks on the opposite side of the millage.” Saying the room was full of “smart, passionate, and experienced people,” including many AAPS administrators, Lightfoot summarized the bulk of A2CRSS budget suggestions as “not as feasible [as other options].”

Lightfoot credited Allen and the instructional services administrators in attendance with doing a good job of explaining the district’s position – at one point, Allen had questioned whether A2CRSS was “comparing apples to apples.” Lightfoot said AAPS should continue to lead public discussion about the district’s budget. Lightfoot closed with “I can say ‘we’re transparent,’ but if we keep getting the same critique, we need to lead in this area.”

Awards and Accolades

A number of awards are typically presented at board meetings, and Wednesday’s meeting was no different.

Michigan Social Studies Award

Leon Pescador, a student at Clague Middle School, was at the meeting to accept an award for being named Middle School Student of the Year by the Michigan Council for Social Studies. A representative from MEEMIC insurance company was on hand to present Pescador with a $250 check for Clague, in addition to his award certificate. Pescador thanked his principal, teacher, and the other “people who run [his] school.”

Leon Pescador accepts his award as Middle School Student of the Year from the Michigan Council for Social Studies, and a $250 check for Clague Middle School.

Board members Baskett and Nelson asked Pescador about his social studies accomplishments. Pescador described the Social Studies Olympiad as, “like the Olympics, but for social studies and not as popular. You get to hear about people from the UP griping about the drive [to the competition].” With some prompting from his mentors, he also mentioned how he had crafted a map about current events in Zimbabwe, and a PowerPoint presentation about renewable energy in Michigan.

Skyline Robotics Team

Two students from the Skyline Robotics Team spoke during public commentary, announcing that they had won the Ann Arbor district competition and that they were hoping to win the Rookie All-Star award at the upcoming state competition. The students closed by soliciting sponsorship from local area businesses to support the team’s trip if they are invited to the national competition.

Later in the meeting, Baskett praised Robotics Team Day, which she attended, as wonderful and “hard to leave.” She echoed the team’s appeal for funding, saying that if everyone just gave a little bit, it would help them should they be chosen to continue competing.

Bands in Review & Choral Cavalcade

During items from the board, Nelson mentioned his recent attendance at the district’s “Bands in Review” performance, which brings together middle and high school bands, as well as the Choral Cavalcade North at Skyline. He pointed out the arts excellence in AAPS is impressive, and that it develops over time: “it does not happen in one year.”

Challenge Day

Nelson’s closing meeting comments also touched on Challenge Day, which he described as “really moving.” Nelson thanked those who support this day, which he described as “building a community of support and understanding for all of us in the room.” One of the things, Nelson said, that really hit him as a Challenge Day participant is that the recession is really affecting the district’s students on an emotional level, but that these students are receiving support from administration, teachers, and other students.

Superintendent’s Report

AAPS superintendent Todd Roberts began his report after midnight, noting the time but saying he would not defer his report, and that it was important to him to share the many good things going on in the district.

He went on to list many awards received by schools, as well as individual staff and students, many of which are detailed in his weekly “This Week” column on the district’s website.

Roberts mentioned that Ann Arbor’s selection as one of the top 10 college towns was due in part to the quality of public education here. He also praised students at Huron, Clague, Forsythe, Community, and Skyline for various accomplishments. He mentioned that Pioneer bands would soon be performing in China, and that a host of AAPS schools have achieved “emerald green” status through the Michigan Green Schools initiative.

The meeting was adjourned by president Deb Mexicotte.

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

Absent: Treasurer Randy Friedman.

Next Regular Meeting: April 14, 2010, 7 p.m., at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library’s fourth floor meeting room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

At the board's study session, Robert Allen, deputy superintendent for operations of AAPS, reported the effect of a state mandate to increase AAPS contributions to the state's public school retirement system – an additional $1 million budget shortfall.

That activity was punctuated with continual references to funding fluctuations at the state level. “There is incredible uncertainty,” stated board president Deb Mexicotte. “Ideas change daily, weekly, hourly.” Even though state-level gyrations may end up changing how the Ann Arbor Public Schools moves forward, she asserted, “We are faced with the facts on the ground, and we have to operate from that position.”

And one of those facts on the ground is a state mandate that has already been put in place. It increases by 2.47% the employer contribution rate to the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System. The mandate adds momentum to the idea of privatization of certain services: If district employees can be replaced with workers who are employed by private contractors, the cost of MPSERS contributions would be saved.

At the study session, trustees also discussed community responses to the district’s budget surveys.

A study session is an opportunity for board members to receive information from AAPS administration, ask questions, and discuss issues in a less formal setting. The public is welcome to attend.

Although only three people spoke during the official public commentary time, a dozen people stayed to ask questions and offer comments throughout the meeting. A trend from the last two BOE regular meetings was continued at the study session – most of the public commentary addressed the negative aspects of privatizing transportation, and custodial/maintenance services.

State Budget Proposal

Todd Roberts, AAPS superintendent, reported on how Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s proposed state budget would affect AAPS, if it is accepted by the legislature. Her budget proposal can be read in its entirety on the state’s website.

Tax Changes Would Fund School Aid Budget

Roberts explained how the governor is proposing to stave off an additional per-pupil funding reduction of $255 by shoring up the School Aid Fund’s (SAF) deficit with additional tax revenue. Granholm has proposed broadening the state sales tax to include services, Roberts explained. The governor’s proposal includes lowering the overall rate from 6% to 5.5%, as well as phasing out the Michigan Business Tax (MBT) over three years.

Roberts said he would be pleased if per-pupil funding stayed at this year’s level, but pointed out that “the tax plan has received a cool reception during its first week in the legislature.” Trustee Susan Baskett clarified that the rate change would be reduced “to 5.5%” not “by 5.5%.”

Primer: Funding the MPSERS

At the study session, Roberts described proposed changes in the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System (MPSERS). We consider first a bit of background on how the retirement system is funded.

MPSERS has been a “defined benefit” plan up until now – retirees are promised a steady monthly pension and health insurance. [It might change to a "defined contribution" plan for future employees, depending on pending legislation.] Employer contributions fund the bulk of the system. Interest accumulation and employee contributions round out the balance. Recently, due to market conditions, little interest has accumulated.

The number of employees in MPSERS is decreasing, in part because of an increased number of earlier retirements. Outsourcing in other districts in the state also reduces the number of MPSERS employees. Yet health care is getting more expensive. Because the system is “pay as you go,” and a smaller number of MPSERS members are now supporting a larger number of retirees’ pensions and health insurance, the employer contribution rate rises.

The amount that school districts contribute to MPSERS is determined as a percentage of their total salary costs. This percentage has been steadily increasing on average over the past decade, from 10.77% of gross salaries in 1998-99 to the current rate of 16.94% of gross salaries.

At Wednesday’s session, deputy superintendent for operations Robert Allen announced that the MPSERS employer contribution rate has just been increased by 2.47%, bringing it up to 19.41% of total salary costs for the upcoming year.

Also at Wednesday’s study session, trustee Glenn Nelson expressed concern that the mandated increase in employer contributions, along with the proposed 3% increase in employee contributions to MPSERS, would still not be adequate to finance the cost of a large number of retirees. Referencing some math he had just quickly done, Nelson declared, “These numbers should be checked, [but] this is a very expensive retirement incentive.”

Retirement Reform

Roberts described Granholm’s proposed changes to MPSERS as a “carrot and stick approach – mostly the stick.” Currently, annual lifelong pension payments are determined according to a three-part formula – multiplying a retiree’s final average compensation (FAC) by his/her years of service to public education, and then by 1.5%.

Key features of the planned reform were described as follows:

• all employees retiring after Oct. 1 would lose subsidized dental and vision coverage
• an employee’s FAC would be averaged over nine years instead of three
• new employees could not retire until age 65 (currently, any employee can retire with 30 years of service to the district)
• employees would need to contribute an additional 1.9-3% to MPSERS.

Roberts pointed out that this increase in employee contribution really has an impact on AAPS budget planning, because employees would be much less likely to agree to a wage decrease locally if they must contribute additional money to MPSERS per the state mandate.

The “carrot” part of the plan, according to Roberts, would be an increase in the retirement multiplier. For all employees who commit to retirement between April 15 and May 15, their retirement salary multiplier would increase by 0.1%, resulting in a 6.6% increase in lifelong pension payments. Originally, Roberts explained, the cost of this 0.1% increase was to have been borne by the districts, but it has now been decided instead that the extra cost burden would be covered by the state. Baskett asked if years of service would be capped at 30, and Roberts clarified that the cap would only apply to other state employees, not public school employees.

Roberts explained that the state projected a savings to school districts of $650 million if Granholm’s budget passes, but that the plan assumes that 75% of eligible employees will retire, and that not all of them will be replaced. Lightfoot asked how many employees would be eligible to retire this year, and Roberts answered, “I don’t know off the top of my head,” but did offer that 71 teachers had already submitted an “intent to retire.”

Roberts mentioned that Granholm’s plan also allows for retirees to return to work part-time for the three years after retiring. A community member questioned whether the part-time retirees would be district employees or contractors, and Roberts confirmed they would still be employees of the district, and still pay into the retirement system. Lightfoot asked if AAPS could re-hire district employees as contract employees, and Roberts answered that yes, that can and does often happen for administrative positions.

Timing of Legislation

Roberts pointed out that the state budget fluctuations have “created a lot of uncertainty.” He praised Granholm’s suggestion that the budget be set by July 1, and be written for two years, saying “it would be very helpful” if that occurred. But he joked that “hopefully it will be [set] before next December,” referencing the delay in the passage of this year’s state budget. Roberts also pointed out how the legislation approving Granholm’s budget would need to be signed into law very quickly in order to allow for employees to opt into the retirement incentive beginning April 15.

Revised Budget Projections

Todd Roberts presented a series of budget scenarios based on three variants of state funding: (i) no additional cuts to the foundation allowance, (ii) an additional $200 per pupil cut, and (iii) an additional $300 per pupil cut.

First, he pointed out two factors that have changed since the community budget forums – an adjustment in the student count number from 16,489 down to 16,440, which currently translates to a $476,427 loss of per-pupil funding. The second factor is the increase in employer retirement contribution rate described earlier in this article.

Robert Allen reiterated that the AAPS projected budget had allowed for a 1.5% increase in retirement contributions. However, he said that the new state-mandated increase of 2.47% will translate to an extra cost per public employee equal to 19.41% of employee’s salaries.  That means an additional $1 million in payments to MPSERS during the 2010-11 fiscal year.

That’s an additional million-dollar budget shortfall.

Roberts said the best case scenario would be if the state is able to keep the foundation allowance constant, as Granholm has proposed. If this happens, he said, AAPS would have a 2010-11 deficit of $14.7 million, lower than originally projected. In the worst case scenario, the state would proceed with the additional $300 per pupil foundation allowance cuts, resulting in a 2010-11 deficit of $19.67, which would be closer to original AAPS projections. In response to a community member’s question, Allen confirmed that the deficit numbers are cumulative from this year through 2010-11.

Glenn Nelson asked how the capital needs budget relates to the foundation allowance. Allen answered that, as of the 2nd quarter of 2009-10, capital needs allocations have been put back into the revenue and expenditures: “The capital needs budget is really a part of our operating budget.”

Roberts reiterated that the 4% salary and benefit reductions initially proposed by AAPS could be significantly affected by state level budget decisions, and that the board will need to plan for alternatives “since negotiations are not nailed down.” He reported that he will come to the board in March with a range of options outlined.

During her public commentary, Kathy Griswold requested that AAPS release its raw financial data and its check register “so the public can analyze it, and make informed decisions.”

Review of Privatization Bids: Transportation

Robert Allen, AAPS deputy superintendent of operations, reported on two bids received in response to a request for proposals (RFP) issued by the district to privatize transportation services. The RFP had asked companies to include the cost of regular routes, field trips, bus aids, and fleet maintenance in their proposals, in order to be comparable to the $6,053,298 that AAPS spends on those services. Allen said both companies offered savings to AAPS: a proposal from Durham would save $840,433, and a proposal from First Student would save $726,683.

Allen then reported that in addition to these two base bids, a number of “alternative bids” were submitted and are still being reviewed. The parameters of a base bid, Allen explained, are to “keep wages consistent, and match as closely as possible the benefits we currently have.” Alternative bids, on the other hand, offer additional savings, usually by offering lower wages or less robust benefits.

When questioned by trustee Simone Lightfoot, Allen confirmed that, per the RFP, the base bids do not include costs associated with management, mechanics, route supervisors, fuel, or additional costs related to special education needs. But the bids do give an “apples to apples” comparison with the district’s costs.

Lightfoot, along with BOE secretary Glenn Nelson, also asked about indirect costs. Lightfoot defined those as “costs that we did not put in the RFP that could come back to haunt us.” Allen responded that his best estimate was that transportation services cost the district around $200,000 indirectly – that included legal, finance, and human resource management costs.

Trustee Susan Baskett asked if the countywide consolidation plan was on schedule. [She was referring to a developing program being spearheaded by the Washtenaw Intermediate School District, which would increase efficiency and share transportation services across the 10 public school districts in Washtenaw County.] Todd Roberts, AAPS superintendent, answered that the final report of the committee reviewing that program is not due until the end of April, but that AAPS would know if that was a possibility by the end of March.

Public Comment on Transportation Bids

Kathy Griswold – a former BOE trustee and one of the founders of the non-partisan political action committee (PAC) Coalition for Responsible Schools for All Students – asked whether either of the transportation bid companies will provide retirement or health care. Allen replied that employees working for Durham or First Student would receive the same wages and comparable health benefits, but would no longer be “tied to” the state retirement system.

During earlier public commentary time, Griswold had argued that privatization is racially-biased and a distraction. She contended that there is no financial reason to outsource, and that it is not in the best interest of students, adding: “I believe it [privatization] is being championed by a board member who is not here tonight, and who for all intents and purposes, does not live in our district.”  [Griswold was alluding to trustee Randy Friedman.]

One community member asked where the bidders were from. Allen did not know, but thought that one might be from Illinois. He did confirm that neither of the companies is local.

Another public commentary speaker said he had worked for AAPS for 28.5 years, and asked if there was “anything in there to help people who are close” to the 30-year point – at which state employees can retire with a full, lifelong pension. Mexicotte responded that the BOE had discussed when certain employee groups will be vested, and that they would talk more about it.

A third speaker asked if the board expected a high number of transportation workers to be rehired, as was the case when AAPS fully privatized its food service to Chartwells in 2008. Allen confirmed that minimizing staff turnover is a goal, and explained that the key factor to getting staff to stay – according to other districts that have privatized – is maintaining the rate of pay.

The most contentious community voice came from a man who took issue with Allen’s assertion that wages and health care benefits would remain the same. Also using the district’s food service as an example, he asserted that food service workers are not in fact paid the same across the board. He contended that new hires are paid $9 per hour, and given health insurance with co-pays that cost $3,000 per year rather than $500 per year.

Allen allowed that while the food service workers were paid exactly the same wage at the time they transferred from AAPS to Chartwells, the district’s contract with an outsourced company does not extend to new hires: “They [Chartwells] are a company … they have a right to do that.” The public commentary speaker concluded with, “You should not be misinformed about what happened to the health care of these employees … Basically, at $9, they cannot afford the health care plan.” Mexicotte’s response was, “That’s often what happens with outsourcing … It’s not a perfect world.”

Review of Privatization Bids: Custodial

Randy Trent, AAPS executive director of physical properties, explained that AAPS was entertaining both separate and combined bids for custodial and maintenance services. He then introduced the six base bids received for custodial services.

Base bids – bids that keep wages and benefits comparable to those currently offered by AAPS – were received from Midwest, GCA, Fastemps, Aramark, GLES, and Omni. The spreadsheet presented to the BOE by Trent was broken out into the following categories for each contractor: lump sum, exception cost, adjusted lump sum, benefit cost, and lump sum less benefits. Trent explained the reasons for the breakdown. The lump sum is the final amount bid by each company. But some adjusting needs to be done, Trent said, to understand those bids in the context of how they compare to the current AAPS custodial costs, as well as to each other.

The bids of two of the companies – Fastemps and Aramark – do not include pay for substitute custodians if employees are absent, so the “exception cost” is how much it would cost to add the substitute costs to those companies’ bids. The other four bids do not have exception costs. Therefore, the best column to use to compare to the total amount AAPS spends on custodians, Trent explained, is the adjusted lump sum, which is the lump sum plus any exception costs. AAPS total custodial costs are $6,955,697, and the adjusted lump sums for custodial services ranged from $5,893,071 to $8,170,560.

Trent then focused on the “benefit cost” column – the amount each company would spend on benefits. The benefit costs submitted by the six companies range widely from $130,894 to $2,298,618 for the 140 positions bid out. In the interview process with each company, Trent explained, the district can negotiate the details of the benefit package offered to employees.

Trent explained that the best way to compare the companies to each other is to subtract the benefit costs they gave from the adjusted lump sums, since a new benefit package could be built during negotiations: “All of [the companies] are very flexible in putting together a benefit package that is acceptable to us.”

With the benefit costs subtracted, the bids look much more comparable to each other, with a “lump sum less benefits” range of $5,329,440 to $6,000,831. Trent stressed in order to compare this column to the AAPS custodial costs, one would have to add in the cost of benefits, which prompted a question from trustee Glenn Nelson: “Of the nearly $7 million district [custodial] costs, how much is our benefit cost?” Allen replied that he did not have the number off the top of his head. Nelson responded that the number should be easy to get.

Trustee Susan Baskett asked why another firm, Du-All, was not included on the spreadsheet. Trent responded that it did not offer a reasonable bid, saying “We want 100% of our workers to be able to transfer.” Lightfoot asked for clarification on the exception costs for some of the potential vendors: “We pay for subs? So, we’re technically responsible for their employees?” and Trent confirmed that yes, if they don’t show up, AAPS would have to pay for subs for Fasttemps and Aramark employees.

Trent then briefly introduced the 15 alternative bids for custodial services, describing them as reflecting “how much the market could bear.” He said that AAPS would be continuing to analyze them. He also pointed out that most of the alternative bids saved money through wage reduction strategies.

Public Comment on Custodial Bids

Darryl Wilson, president of the local custodial and maintenance workers union, mentioned that the current AAPS employees already have an established sub pool that pays $9.85 an hour with no benefits. Deb Mexicotte responded, “Your comment has been taken and acknowledged.”

Another community comment centered on the scope of work performed by current employees, saying that the typical area covered by a custodian has almost doubled since 1994, and that AAPS custodians are uniquely positioned to keep up with the workload: “If a machine breaks, we can fix it. You’re not going to see savings [from private companies] with areas twice as big.”

Review of Privatization Bids: Maintenance

After a missing Powerpoint slide was located by Amy Osinski, secretary to the board, Randy Trent continued with a review of the bids received for privatizing maintenance services. Trustee  Simone Lightfoot asked whether AAPS maintained responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep of related equipment, and Trent confirmed that it would.

AAPS received base maintenance bids from seven companies: Aramark, Fasttemps, Midwest, GCA, GLES, Omni, and Barton Malow. Three of them had exception costs for hiring substitutes. The adjusted lump sums range from $1,398,600 to $2,149,175, and can be compared to AAPS annual maintenance costs of $1,902,619. As with the custodial bids, Trent pointed out the wide range in benefits costs included in the proposals – from $23,375 to $410,468 for 25 maintenance positions. And when benefit costs are subtracted from the adjusted lump sums, the range of “wage and overhead” costs narrows from $1,227,400 to $1,859,175, making the bids more easily comparable to each other.

Trent also briefly introduced the 12 alternative bids, for which the adjusted lump sums ranged from $730,000 to $1,551,263. Almost all of the alternative bids include lower wages as the cost-savings measure. He stated that the alternative bids would be reviewed by AAPS administration in more detail.

Susan Baskett then asked Trent if he would like guidance from the board on whether to consider the wage reductions presented in the alternative bids, but before he could answer, board president Deb Mexicotte shut down the discussion, interjecting, “That’s something for closed session.”

Baskett then pointed out that two bidders, GLES and Barton Malow, are using unionized workers, and that it might be possible for employees to maintain their union if enough of them are rehired, or to join a new union already working under the chosen contractor. Superintendent Todd Roberts clarified for Baskett that the board would next discuss the bids on March 10 – the next regular BOE meeting. Baskett thanked the administration for “weeding stuff out and figuring out what’s left to do.”

Public Comment on Maintenance Bids

In response to two questions from community members present at the meeting, Mexicotte confirmed that the alternate bids were not comparable to AAPS costs in terms of wages and benefits.  She also confirmed that the scope of expected maintenance coverage was delineated in the RFP. Another question about the inclusion of significant others in the benefit packages led Mexicotte to reassert that the district is committed to maintaining comparable benefits for any employees who transfer to the contract company, if AAPS decides to privatize.

There was a question about the length of the potential contracts, if a bid is accepted. Trent, Mexicotte, and Allen each confirmed that it’s flexible – the base bid is set originally for three years, but can be canceled annually, and is reviewed by the board officially every five years.

Darryl Wilson, president of the local custodial and maintenance workers union, followed up their responses by asking, “And, how long would wage retention stay in place – for the duration of the contract? For three years?” Trent, Allen, Mexicotte, and Baskett all reassured Wilson that a company would not be able to lower salaries right away. Baskett offered, “Once you’re hired on, your salary is locked in for the length of the contract.”

Members of the public who were present expressed lack of trust in the good faith of the potential outsourcing companies: “With no union, they could make us go down to $6 an hour,” and “I’ve heard other districts dropped wages to $9 an hour.” Trent again tried to clarify, saying that companies have to honor the salary negotiated in the contract, and argued that in other districts, wages were low because they started out that way. He again reiterated that AAPS insisted that base bids include comparable wages and benefits.

Other members of the public against privatization included a plumber for the district, who shared a description of his work with the pools, and said, “On behalf of all of our best interests, I don’t see privatization being the answer.” He mentioned that in 1994, when outsourcing maintenance workers was considered, the union and administration worked together on a coordinated plan to save the jobs, but that this time it was different: “I don’t see any alternative plan on the table at this point, and it scares me. … We could try to tailor a plan out of the situation we’re in.”

During his public commentary time, Wilson said he was “here to review.” First, he asserted that data proves privatization is unsafe. He reminded the board that the company that hired a felon accused of sexually harassing a student still works for AAPS, and that two more contractors have been invited to the district since then with the same background check procedure.

Then Wilson addressed quality issues, saying that when he took time off to come speak to the board, there were three complaints about the subs covering for him while he was away. He reminded the board that a quality assurance committee was supposed to be set up two years ago, but that despite repeated attempts on his part, no one has approached him to set it up. Lastly, Wilson pointed out that privatization has failed in other places it’s been attempted, such as in Illinois, where a school district recently canceled its contact with a private company, and hired back its bus drivers.

Wilson closed with, “Ann Arbor’s always been a leader – why are we following?”

Community Responses to Budget Survey and Forums

Liz Margolis, district director of communications, and Jane Landefeld, director of student accounting and administrative support, presented the results of two community surveys conducted by AAPS . One was an online survey presented on the district website, and the second was a survey completed by community members who attended one or more of the budget forums held in January. The surveys were used to get community feedback on suggested budget reductions, as well as to collect additional input and new ideas.

Margolis began by cautioning that the surveys were “unscientific” because a single responder could have submitted multiple responses, or completed both surveys. Further, not all respondents commented in every are making the “total” number different for each category. The online Zoomerang surveys garnered 338 responses, and 519 surveys were completed at the budget forums.

Of the budget forum responses, 96% of them “supported” or “somewhat supported” the cost-saving and revenue-building options that had been presented at the forums. Margolis explained that all responses had been grouped into the following seven categories: instructional/academic programs, administration, facilities, extracurricular activities, transportation, new revenue, and other.

Instructional/Academic Programs Responses

Half the responses in this category revolved around curriculum and programming: 35% thought that teachers should make contract concessions, and should be held more accountable.

About 30% of responses focused on reorganizing schools, such as restructuring the school week. Margolis pointed out one example of a 50-50 split in responses, regarding 7th hour classes – half of the responses said to keep it, and half said to cut it.

Susan Baskett asked for clarification about which responses were being included in this presentation. Landefeld explained that she and Margolis were summarizing themes on which many people had commented, rather than listing comments present on only one or two surveys.

Administration Responses

Regarding administration, the largest chunk of comments were about the number of high school principals: 20% of responses included questions about why AAPS needs so many principals and 10% suggested reducing number, salaries, and/or benefits of all administrative employees. Margolis said that Student Intervention and Support Services (SISS) was mentioned often as a place to look for efficiency and savings.

Todd Roberts clarified for Glenn Nelson that SISS administrators are reimbursed by the state. Nelson then pointed out that the public needs to recognize that eliminating certain positions will not save AAPS money, due to reimbursement structures.

Facilities Responses

Fully half of the responses regarding facilities mentioned concerns with the number of schools currently being operated by AAPS, and suggested some closures, particularly Community High. Many suggestions were also made for ways to maximize schools’ energy efficiency. A greater percentage of forum participants were concerned with privatization than those who responded to the online survey.

Margolis told trustees that 31 of the forum surveys showed support for privatization of custodial and maintenance services. But Simone Lightfoot indicated that the number seemed high based on what they’d heard people say at the forums. Margolis responded that the reporting out heard at the forums was based on the group survey completed at each table, and that she was now offering summary data from the individual surveys completed. In response to the notion of closing Community High, Nelson commented that the board’s performance committee had discussed how people want the smaller, more comfortable environments often associated with charter schools.

Extracurricular Activities Responses

Margolis mentioned that a majority of responses support “pay to play” – that is, charging students a fee for participating in extracurricular activities, including but not limited to athletics. One-third of responses mentioned wanting to ensure the existence of scholarships for students who could not afford the fee. There were also many additional suggestions made to increase revenue, such as charging higher event fees, increasing fundraising, and seeking more corporate sponsorship.

Baskett clarified that “pay to play” really should be called “pay to participate,” since parents were not buying playing time for their kids. Deb Mexicotte pointed out the importance of delineating which programs should be considered “extracurricular,” giving the example that “music is actually academic.” Landefeld confirmed that the issue of distinguishing between academic and extracurricular came up in the surveys too, and that AAPS administration needs to make that clear. Margolis added, that “as a parent, we already pay.”

Transportation Responses

Around 40% of responses encouraged the use of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (AATA) to transport students. Discussions about that have already been initiated, according to district administration. Margolis reported that 25% of responses asked the district to increase the efficiency of bus service, 15% supported increasing walk zones, and 10% suggested charging fees for all busing outside of regular school hours.

Regarding privatization of transportation, the online survey results were fairly split. Of the 214 completed surveys that mentioned transportation in response to open-ended questions,  21/214 mentioned being in favor of privatization, and 17/214 mentioned opposing it. The forum survey responses were more opposed to privatization overall, but “not as black and white,” according to Margolis. Forum survey respondents cited concerns about liability, loss of role models, and ability to demonstrate cost savings. Landefeld said that overall, the comments on transportation services centered on being more efficient, and mentioned getting parents to commit to ridership as an example.

New Revenue Responses

Half of responses suggested charging for or increasing the fee for extracurricular events, school supplies, or textbook rental. About 40% suggested increasing the rental fee for school use outside of school hours, and also increasing the number and types of these rentals. Around 30% suggested working to increase “school of choice” students. Other suggestions made were to work for change at the state level, and use more parent volunteers.

Other Responses

The most common additional suggestion was to reduce salary and benefit costs, followed by re-examining high school programming options, and reducing or eliminating some schools.

Board Discussion on Community Responses to Surveys

Todd Roberts said that some of the community feedback reflected options that AAPS is already exploring. He also pointed out that the question of the number of schools would be part of a conversation conducted by the strategic planning committee, which is due to resume its work in April.

Glenn Nelson thanked the administration for pulling together the report, and said it would be very useful. He also mentioned that two of the suggested ideas that resonated with him were having an earlier start to the elementary school day to accommodate working parents, and to be in touch with Washtenaw Community College regarding setting up additional room rentals. Irene Patalan agreed that there were pieces of the report that “tap you on the shoulder.” She also pointed out the diversity of ideas presented, and that many of the responses conflicted directly with others.

Simone Lightfoot also thanked the AAPS administration for its work, saying “These online results were clearly different from what I saw at the town hall meetings.”

Susan Baskett asked Roberts to clarify for what activities AAPS can and cannot charge a fee. Roberts clarified that AAPS cannot charge for basic transportation to and from school, but that the district could charge for field trips. Similarly, Roberts explained, the district cannot charge for any supplies that students are required to have to do the work for a class.

A community member commented that she did not remember the online survey asking specifically about privatization, and Margolis allowed that it did not. However, she explained, at the forums, the community was asked to comment directly on the options presented, including privatization. Margolis also reiterated that the forum group survey and the forum individual survey were not the same, and agreed that the online and forum individual surveys did not line up exactly in their wording.

Final comments on the survey responses came from a community member concerned with what would happen to the children of district employees who currently attend AAPS if those employees are outsourced. He estimated that this situation would affect approximately 70 students. Some students are able to attend AAPS schools based a parent’s employed with the district, not residency in the district.

Deb Mexicotte answered first, saying that the question was interesting and that the board should take note. Roberts then began to answer, saying that there was nothing that would prohibit the board considering the issue, but before he could finish, Dave Comsa, assistant superintendent for human resources and legal services,  jumped up from his seat on the side of the room and asserted: “We [AAPS] should take a further look.” Baskett asked for clarification of board policy on the issue, and Roberts answered that currently in that situation, the student would leave with the departing staff member.

The meeting ended with Mexicotte thanking AAPS administration for the information it presented, and everyone who attended. She reminded community members that they were welcome to contact the board by e-mail with any follow-up information they wanted to share.

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

Absent: Treasurer Randy Friedman

Next meeting: The next public meeting of the BOE will be a study session on March 8, at which the board will interview the eight candidates who have applied to fill the board vacancy left by Adam Hollier, who resigned earlier this month. The interviews will begin at 5:30 p.m., and will take place in the main conference room of the Balas administration building, 2555 S. State St.

Next regular meeting: March 10, 2010, 7 p.m., at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 4th floor board room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

Todd Roberts, left, superintendent of Ann Arbor Public Schools, talks Adam Hollier, who resigned as an AAPS board of education trustee on Wednesday night. (Photos by the writer.)

Leading up to his announcement, Hollier used his parting comments as an AAPS trustee to offer support to the workers facing possible privatization, as well as to make a strong pitch for private giving to support the schools in light of a looming budget shortfall.

Also during the meeting, 13 speakers filled the maximum allotted public commentary time of 45 minutes, most of them focusing on the perils of privatization. A few speakers were there to express frustration with the district’s handling of a recent incident at Logan Elementary School.

Other actions at Wednesday’s meeting included a report on a new communication system that would allow the district to quickly send mass voicemails, texts or emails, and the presentation of several awards. And in the board’s informational packet – but not discussed at the meeting – was news of a possible state retirement mandate that could negatively impact the district’s budget.

Trustee Adam Hollier Resigns

Adam Hollier began his resignation statement by saying he had prepared comments, but had decided to “wing it” in light of issues raised during the meeting. He stressed that, in hearing what speakers said during the public commentary, “it does take a village to raise a child.” He recalled that some of his fondest memories were of a custodian at his elementary school, Mr. Johnson, and said they had developed a real relationship.

Referencing the few dozen AAPS employees present at the meeting to oppose privatization, Hollier argued that school support staff can make a big difference in students’ lives: “We don’t see a child fall through the cracks the day they fall … You say, ‘I wish I could have helped them …’ Many of the people in this room make a difference when no one else can.”

Hollier cited a lack of time, as well as a desire to work on education reform at the state level, as reasons for his resignation. [Hollier is the chief of staff for state Rep. Bert Johnson, who represents Michigan’s 5th District, including Hamtramck, Highland Park, and parts of Wayne County and the city of Detroit. He won his school board seat in May 2009, though he had withdrawn from the race in April. His withdrawal came too late to remove his name from the ballot, and he won the election.]

On Wednesday, Hollier expressed frustration at the current education funding crisis. He said he doesn’t know anyone in Lansing who has the answer, but since the school system is dependent on decisions made at the state and national levels, reform needs to happen there. “The problems are beyond what we can solve here,” he said.

Hollier said he believes his efforts would be better spent in Lansing, and that the board deserves a trustee who can devote more time to the position.

Referencing the defeated countywide educational millage last November, Hollier said, “We had an opportunity not to fight these battles, but it didn’t work out that way.” Addressing the public directly, Hollier continued, “I encourage you to support the public school system as though the millage passed – because it did.” [The millage failed countywide, but was supported by voters in the Ann Arbor school district.]

Hollier outlined a possible private giving target for AAPS, saying if each of the district’s 16,458 students were sponsored by a parent or community member paying $10 per month during the school year, the district could raise $164,000. Or, he suggested, community members could be asked to pay a dollar a day. [This is a theme that would be picked up later in the meeting by trustee Randy Friedman.] As a comparison, had the millage passed, AAPS would have received over $11 million annually for 5 years. [For details on public school funding, and the structure of the failed millage, see previous Chronicle coverage: "Does It Take a Millage?"]

Hollier closed his comments, made during the “Items from the Board” section at the end of the meeting, by thanking his fellow trustees and the community, asserting, “This has been the greatest experience of my life. Though I’m leaving the board, I’m not leaving the district.” President Deb Mexicotte accepted Hollier’s resignation on behalf of the board, and opened the floor to comments from other trustees.

Glenn Nelson told Hollier it was great to get to know him, that he was impressed by Hollier’s intelligence, and that he looked forward to hearing more from him as his career evolved. Irene Patalan acknowledged that it was a hard decision for Hollier to resign, and wished him luck in his next step.

Susan Baskett echoed those sentiments, “I look forward to seeing where your career goes  … Go up there and kick booty!” Superintendent Todd Roberts said he appreciated Hollier’s commitment, knowing how busy he’s been.

And Simone Lightfoot commended Hollier’s work on the board, saying, “I’m so proud of you; I’m almost speechless. Thank you for your service. I expect great things.” She praised Hollier’s conscientiousness, diplomacy, and articulateness, thanking him for “encouraging us to think outside of the box.”

Timeline and Process for Selection of New Trustee

Deb Mexicotte shared that when Hollier told her privately that he was planning to resign as of Feb. 12, she began to work out a timeline, since the board is required to fill the vacancy within 30 days. The board was at somewhat of an advantage, she said, since everyone was familiar with the process, having just appointed Simone Lightfoot to the board last December to replace former trustee Helen Gates-Bryant. The person selected to replace Hollier will serve through Dec. 31, 2010.

Mexicotte explained that the application timeline was structured to accommodate both the AAPS and the University of Michigan breaks occurring in late February, saying that the board “didn’t want to disenfranchise any part of the community” who might want to apply. She also encouraged those who came forward before to reapply, and proposed following timeline: an executive committee meeting on Feb. 9 to decide on interview questions and specific process; a meeting on March 8 to interview candidates; and candidate presentations and appointment at the regular board meeting on March 10.

Randy Friedman said the timeline was amenable to him, but suggested contacting the six other applicants who had competed for Lightfoot’s seat to see if they would like to renew their applications. He also suggested that those applicants go through a shorter interview process, since the board was already familiar with them. Mexicotte said it was her intent to contact the recent applicants, and that the executive committee would consider a shorter interview.

Glenn Nelson pointed out that, while he respects people’s time, shortening the interview presupposes that the interview questions will be exactly the same this time as they were when interviewing for the position awarded to Lightfoot. If the questions were at all different, he argued, all applicants would need to be given an opportunity to answer the exact same questions. Adam Hollier reminded the board that Lightfoot was not able to interview any of the previous candidates, as she was one of the applicants at the time, which Mexicotte conceded was an “excellent point.”

After some additional clarifying questions were answered, the following timeline for selecting a new trustee was set:

• Monday, Feb. 8, 4 p.m.: Deadline for community to submit possible interview questions to board office.
• Tuesday, Feb. 9: Executive committee meeting to select questions and plan interview process.
• Friday, Feb. 19, 4 p.m.: Deadline to submit application for vacant trustee position to board office.
• Monday, March 8: Candidate interviews by the board.
• Wednesday, March 10, 7 p.m.: Candidate presentations at the regular board meeting, and candidate selection.

The vacancy was posted Thursday to the board’s website, and states that any individual wishing to serve must be a U.S. citizen, at least 18 years of age, a resident of the AAPS school district, and registered to vote. Applications should contain a resume, a letter of intent detailing the candidate’s experiences and qualifications, and two letters of recommendation. They should be sent to Amy Osinski by mail at AABOE, 2555 S. State St., Ann Arbor, MI 48104; by fax at 734-994-2414; or by email at osinski@aaps.k12.mi.us.

Private Giving to AAPS

Referencing Adam Hollier’s final comments, trustee Randy Friedman asked superintendent Todd Roberts if there was a formal process already in place for community members to donate to the AAPS. Roberts explained that the Ann Arbor Public Schools Educational Foundation is the vehicle for private individuals who want to donate to the AAPS. Roberts added that the foundation has already run a campaign similar to what Hollier suggested, trying to encourage AAPS-district residents to donate the same amount they would have paid if the millage had passed (about $250 per year for a home valued at $250,000).

Roberts also stated that the second phase of that giving campaign was slated to begin in the next month or so. [For more information about the work of the foundation, see The Chronicle’s coverage of its most recent Celebration of Innovation and Excellence event, held each spring: "Educational Foundation Marks Achievements"]

Friedman expressed his frustration at the foundation’s campaign, saying it “has not been well-publicized or well-organized.” He suggested that AAPS should reach out to the community directly, saying that he’s been talking private giving since before he had gray hair and asking, “Why is this so difficult?” He argued that the foundation does not have the resources to “stimulate, manage, and control” efforts at private giving, and that “this is not something that lends itself to volunteerism.” He added: “I’d like to support a campaign. I’d like there to be a campaign to support.”

Referencing Hollier’s earlier suggestions, Friedman argued that establishing an AAPS-led private giving campaign would be “a great legacy to this young trustee,” and asked the board to consider it, saying “My challenge is to the only person at the table who has a computer with a database…I’d like that on the agenda.”

Deb Mexicotte asked whether the board wanted to direct the administration to look into Friedman’s proposals, and the board agreed. Mexicotte clarified that this was not a vote, but that she “look[ed] for nodding.” She then assigned Roberts to look into how such a campaign might be structured, what the advantages and challenges might be, and to report back to the board at his earliest convenience.

Public Commentary: Privatization

Walking into the downtown library, where the regular board meetings are held, The Chronicle passed through a throng of picketing members of the custodial, maintenance, and grounds workers’ union.

Workers demonstrate against privatization of certain school services on Feb. 3 outside of the downtown library on Fifth Avenue, where the AAPS school board meeting took place.

The 16 members were walking slowly back and forth along Fifth Avenue, holding signs in opposition to the proposed privatization of their services, as well as to privatized transportation services for the district.

At the meeting, board president Deb Mexicotte reminded the 13 speakers signed up for public commentary, as well as the dozens of teachers, students, and co-workers there to support them, that public commentary is limited to 45 minutes.

Because the time is divided equally among the number of speakers present, that meant that  each speaker would be given no more than 3 minutes and 20 seconds to share his or her comments.

Privatization Commentary: Head Start Licensing, NAEYC Accreditation in Jeopardy

The bulk of the speakers at Wednesday’s public commentary were there to oppose privatization, and this time, a new voice joined their ranks. Marifran Brown, a preschool teacher with 22 years of service to the district, spoke in “support of my colleagues in custodial, maintenance, and transportation services.”

Brown offered a new perspective to the ongoing debate over privatization in the district, arguing that AAPS is in danger of losing Head Start grant funding and National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) accreditation status if they privatize. She explained that the preschool has specific needs that would not be met if the people essential to her educational team were privatized.

The district’s Preschool and Family Center serves a specific population of students. According to a report made by preschool staff to the board’s performance committee last year, two-thirds of the families served by the pre-school received special education services, and the remaining one-third were living in poverty. At that same meeting, an update was given on the then-ongoing accreditation process. The minutes state: “Ongoing evaluation to achieve NAEYC accreditation has been a lot of work …There are few accredited preschools in the country, so this is an area where Ann Arbor has also taken the opportunity to move to the next level. … Trustees noted that there is little appreciation of the comprehensive nature of our Preschool programming, due primarily to few informational opportunities outlining the scope and range of services.”

At Wednesday’s board meeting, Brown explained that the nature of working with this population demands a high degree of communication and cooperation among all members of the team, using transportation services as an example. “Bus drivers are a critical link to parents,” she said. “We are asking parents of [at-risk] three-year-olds to put their children on a bus. It’s not fair to say that we don’t know who’s driving the bus, or if they can work a 5-point harness. You’re not going to know – they won’t answer to you.”

Brown cited the extensive inspections to maintain Head Start licensing, as well as the criteria required to meet NAEYC accreditation standards as being impossible to achieve “without the support of custodial, maintenance, and transportation services.” She argued that they’ve been able to meet the criteria only because of the entire team. The higher staff turnover that would accompany privatization, due to lower pay and lack of retirement benefits, would imperil the district’s ability to keep staff properly prepared for the ongoing licensing inspections, she said. “We could not keep our grant and licensing criteria met – we will not have had time to train people.”

Privatization Commentary: Personal Appeals, Sacrifice

Multiple speakers made emotional appeals to the board, expressing fears and worries about how privatization would affect them personally, and offering to take additional pay cuts to protect their jobs.

A custodian with 20 years of service said she had graduated with just a 6th grade reading level, and that her education failed her. She credits AAPS with giving her a way “to not feel like a failure.” In return, she said she has given “beyond anything” back: “I fill in when teachers, secretaries, principals are late. I serve breakfast.” She listed numerous occasions when students have leaned on her, and she has been able to provide support and guidance, even to a student considering suicide. “The district needs to look at what we give,” she said, “and we’re still willing to give.”

Another employee, a bus driver with four years of district service, said this job is one of three she currently holds, and that it pays the majority of her bills. “Financially,” she said, “we are your smallest liability, but we are your greatest asset.” She asserted that she knows all about budgeting and cutting back, yet she still struggles to make ends meet. She asked, “I wonder, [if privatization occurs] will they hire everyone back, or just a percentage? I wonder if I can afford health insurance. Why diminish the quality of living standards of the poorest paid employees?” She closed by encouraging the district to put something on its website about how parents can contact their legislators about school funding issues,  offering to use her van to spread flyers with that information.

Another bus driver, with 29 years in the district, also spoke of being willing to sacrifice personally for the good of the whole. He suggested that if you take the district’s total operating budget of roughly $192 million, that the $20 million shortfall could be made up entirely if all employees agreed to take an 11% pay cut. He said he would agree to that, as long as the cut was universal.

Privatization Commentary: Public Appeals for Public Appeals

Three of the speakers appealed directly to the public, encouraging parents and community members to write trustees and legislators themselves. A transportation worker with 16 years of service pleaded with parents directly, saying they should be worried, and “not be afraid to call – we need your complaints. [Privatization] is not only going to hurt us, but also the parents, and the children of the parents.”

Another speaker, a bus driver, said, “I really look forward to retiring with somewhat of a pension, and I’m concerned about that. Could we contact our legislators to make a stronger or more powerful statement to Lansing?”

Privatization Commentary: AAPS Mission Statement

Two speakers, one teacher and one bus driver, spoke directly about how they saw privatization as antithetical to the district’s mission statement.

Teacher Carol Mohrlock pointed out that the AAPS mission statement, “talks about nurturing the human spirit and building alliances with families and communities,” and shared her concern that privatization of “any department … moves us further from this statement.” She questioned how the district hopes to maintain its vision of excellence in customer service by “hiring individuals who are not invested in the district,” and encouraged the district to analyze how departments can work smarter and more efficiently before eliminating them. “The answer lies within us and with our district employees,” she said.

Bus driver Penny Scheppe echoed these concerns, and framed the question as a moral one. “Simple logic should tell us that it’s impossible for a private company to deliver the same service for less,” she said, adding that most people seem to forget that private companies owe a legal responsibility to make a profit for their investors. “If wages are reduced and benefits are eliminated, there’s money to go toward profit,” she said. “But, [this] profit comes at a huge cost to the public … Should the [AAPS] be promoting greed as a building block of society to our kids?” She also asserted that the district can always find someone to do the job cheaper, “but you won’t find anyone to do the job better!”

Privatization Commentary: AAPS Already Gets “Tremendous Value”

Multiple speakers used the phase “tremendous value” in referencing the savings AAPS gets by maintaining its own staff, for transportation in particular. One bus driver pointed out that more delineated accounting – splitting out the wages for drivers and monitors from administrative and maintenance costs – would show this savings more clearly. He suggested that 90% of drivers are part-time, creating a huge savings for the district in terms of benefits. He also argued that privatization shows a lack of long-range planning and that the net effect will be exhausted drivers, if workers need to get second or third jobs to make up the lack of pay and benefits.

Privatization Commentary: Student Safety a Key Issue

Echoing the above comments, the same bus driver who had suggested a universal pay cut also pointed out how privatization could impact what he called the current “culture of safety” in transportation services. “What do you want the bus driver of your child to be thinking about?” he asked. He claimed that part-time, privatized workers would be forced to look for additional work to make ends meet, and would end up exhausted. He closed by asking, “At what point [do we] allow the deterioration of the safety culture to cause the death of a child?”

Reminding the board of another perspective on safety, Darryl Wilson, president of the local chapter of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 1182, representing custodians and maintenance workers, cited the 2004 safety incident in which a felon with a history of assault was hired as a contract custodian. Wilson used the incident to highlight the inadequacy of trusting private companies to do complete and proper background checks on their employees, and pointed out that Michigan State Police “admit to having up to a 64% failure rate,” depending on the timing of felonies and whether or not they occurred out of state. (Currently, all AAPS employees are also checked against a federal database.)

“You say, ‘It’s just one incident’ … This person stabbed people,” Wilson asserted. Quoting a statement made by Liz Margolis in an Ann Arbor News article on the incident in which she said the employee “would not have been hired had the district known he’d been convicted of assault,” Wilson asked, “When you’re thinking about privatization, who do you want in your schools?”

Privatization Commentary: It’s the Problem, Not the Solution

A head custodian at one of the district middle schools cited a series of examples of what he sees as wasteful spending. All were examples of outsourcing that he felt could have been done by AAPS employees for less cost, particularly electrical work such as counting light bulbs, switches, and outlets, or installing a new light bulb in a food warmer.

He also asked, “How does the district explain the new ‘school messenger’ phone system?” [This system is described in some detail in the superintendent’s report later in this article.] “Technology is important,” he stated, “but are we beginning to put in place a system that will next replace another group of employees?” He pointed out how the AAPS used to have plumbers, but how plumbing is now outsourced completely. “If the AAPS has slowly eliminated custodial and maintenance workers, then why is there still an issue regarding the cost for these departments?” he asked. “Could private companies be charging the district too much money?”

Incident at Logan Elementary

Also generating public commentary, as well as response from district officials, was an incident in which a fifth-grade teacher left the Logan Elementary school building without informing the principal.

Public Commentary on Logan Incident

Two parents, both representing families of fifth-grade students at Logan Elementary, expressed frustration with the district’s handling of a recent incident there, in which a teacher left his school unexpectedly during instructional time and has been placed on administrative leave. After the teacher left, the school was placed temporarily in lockdown mode.

The first parent, Kate Klaus, referenced a letter given to board trustees, which she said was pulled together in less than 12 hours and signed by a majority of parents with students in the class to show that “we are united in support for the teacher.” The parents, Klaus said, decided to write a group letter expressing support for the teacher because “the voice of the community acting together is stronger and louder” than that of individuals. She acknowledged that it was wrong for the teacher to leave the building, but said that he should be allowed to return to his classroom immediately.

Calling the lockdown policy “seriously flawed,” Klaus claimed that “someone exercised criminally poor judgment by calling police and imposing a lockdown.” She spoke on behalf of the teacher again, saying “he turned the kids into critical thinkers” and arguing that “children have already been harmed” by his absence. Klaus closed by repeating her request to return the teacher: “We are asking that the rule the teacher broke not be considered more important than the kids the rule was designed to protect.”

A second parent, Tina Pappas, also spoke in support of the teacher. She asked all parents and students present on the teacher’s behalf to stand up. When they did, filling nearly a whole side of the public seating available in the boardroom, she noted that the teacher had “near-unanimous” support from the families of the students in his class. She claimed that “what should have been a simple personnel issue became a non-objective lockdown,” and asserted that this is a dedicated teacher, who teaches each student to “be a good person, and learn about the world.” In closing, Pappas also requested the teacher be taken off leave: “He needs to get back in the classroom. Personnel issues need to be worked out between administration, him, and the union rep.”

District Response to Logan Incident

A follow-up call by The Chronicle to Liz Margolis, spokesperson for the AAPS, provides some background on the incident in question. Margolis outlined the situation as follows: Late last month, a fifth-grade teacher left the building without informing the principal. He left his laptop and keys on the principal’s desk, spoke with another teacher, and then drove off in his car. That teacher went to the principal, and reported what had been said. The principal then called the district office, as well as the Ann Arbor Police Department liaison officer assigned to Logan. What the teacher said before leaving has not been made public, but based on his statement, the officer recommended a lockdown, which was enacted.

Margolis acknowledged that Logan had been following outdated lockdown policies that were “over-the-top,” but asserted that, though students had been frightened and unsettled by the procedures, they were not in danger at any time. She also added that the Logan principal and police liaison officer devoted three hours during last week’s regularly scheduled PTO meeting to review proper district lockdown procedures with parents. As of week’s end, the teacher in question remains on administrative leave, and a substitute has been placed in his classroom.

Challenge Regarding Anonymous Commentary

Trustee Susan Baskett thanked the community for participating in public commentary, and said she appreciated public comments.

However, she said, “what I cannot embrace are anonymous contacts.” Baskett then held up a letter that she had received from an anonymous source, saying that the letter contained “serious, incorrect allegations” but that she was unable to respond, as the letter was unsigned. Two other board members also received the correspondence.

Baskett issued a challenge to the writer, asking him or her to come forward and “allow us a way to communicate … on an adult level.”

Board Committee Reports, Mack Pool Task Force Update

The board maintains two standing committees, performance and planning.

Susan Baskett, chair of the performance committee, reported that at its recent meeting they had reviewed the entrance and exit procedures for Stone School and the Roberto Clemente Student Development Center. The committee is comfortable with the procedures, she said, and will release them to the public soon. The committee will also be scheduling meetings in March to look at redesigning the district’s alternative programs. The committee also discussed the role, anticipated needs of, and way to improve the district’s communications. The school messenger program was reviewed as a means of allowing the district to quickly disseminate information. Also, Baskett reported that the performance committee is planning additional discussions about charter schools.

Irene Patalan then gave a report as chair of the planning committee. At its Jan. 26 meeting, the committee was briefed on the electrician bid, which was shared as a first briefing at Wednesday’s board meeting. The committee also heard an update on the status of a possible license agreement involving Mack Pool. Patalan explained that the city has created a task force, including three AAPS representatives, to study possible ways to increase revenue and decrease operating costs of Mack Pool. The AAPS representatives on the task force are: Randy Trent, executive director of physical properties; Sara Aeschbach, director of AAPS Community Education and Recreation; and Naomi Zikmund-Fisher, principal of Ann Arbor Open School at Mack, where the pool is located.

The city and the AAPS have an agreement dating back to 1974 regarding the sharing of Mack Pool. Patalan explained how the task force is considering amending this agreement to allow the city a longer block of time during the day to rent out the pool. [See previous Chronicle coverage of the recommendations from the Mack Pool task force.]

School Messenger System

As part of his superintendent’s report, Todd Roberts introduced the School Messenger system, a new communications system being put in place throughout the district, which will allow all schools to send messages via voicemail, text message, or email at a fast rate. He said the system can make 3,000 phone calls in 3 minutes, and that it would improve the district’s ability to communicate during emergencies, as well as to advertise upcoming events and help with attendance at the secondary level. “We believe it will allow us to get information out much more quickly,” he said, adding that the system includes a survey feature, and is translatable into languages other than English. Roberts also suggested that the PTO and other organizations would be allowed access to the system, within certain guidelines.

Prompted by a request for clarification by Deb Mexicotte, Roberts explained the School Messenger system was funded by a federal Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools (REMS) grant. He added that AAPS was one of the only school districts in the state to receive REMS funding, and that the nearly $400,000 in funding over two grant cycles, allows AAPS “to do some things we would not otherwise be able to do.”

Budget Update

The information packet distributed as part of Wednesday’s meeting also contained a memorandum from superintendent Todd Roberts regarding proposed changes to the Michigan Public Schools Employees Retirement System (MPSERS), and how the changes could affect the district.

Retirees in MPSERS currently receive an annual pension equal to 1.5% times their years of service, times their final average annual pay. Gov. Jennifer Granholm is recommending a change to MPSERS that would increase the retirement multiplier to 1.6%. For example, if an AAPS teacher earning an average of $80,000 over the past few years, with 30 years of service to the district, chose to retire at the end of this school year, his or her annual pension payment would increase from $36,000 to $38,400. This additional cost per retiree would be paid by the district. Granholm’s plan also increases employee contributions to MPSERS by 3%.

Roberts’ memo explained that, in addition to the costs of the early-retirement incentive, the proposed increase in retirement costs for employees “may impact the ability to lower our salary and benefit costs locally because of the additional costs being added to employees by the state.” It also states that the change would likely result in a significant number of retirements for the system, which might cause significant staffing issues in spring and summer.

At this time, these are still proposals. Legislation would be required at the state level to enact Granholm’s recommendations.

First Briefing on General Bid for Electrical Work

As referenced earlier in the public commentary, AAPS outsources much of its electrical work. At Wednesday’s meeting, Randy Trent, the district’s executive director of physical properties, approached the board to request their annual approval of a blanket bid for 2,000 hours of electrical work. The Bid Review Proposal included in the board meeting packet states that pre-approval allows the physical properties department to act on electrical maintenance requirements in a timely way. This year, Trent recommended the district’s contract be granted to Wiltec Technologies, Inc.

Trent explained that an outside contractor is needed because “we don’t have the trained staff to do these things.” He said the department received several bids, and that the two lowest bidders did not have any low-voltage experience, so his recommendation went to the lowest qualified bidder, which was Wiltec.

Glenn Nelson asked whether the district has had any experience with Wiltec, or information on the quality of their work. Wiltec is an Ann Arbor company, Trent replied, with decades of experience with AAPS. He added that Wiltec was a successful bidder on the bond issue for digital and lighting controls, and that their work is of very high quality.

Susan Baskett asked for clarification on whether the RFP (request for proposals) specified the necessary experience, since the two lowest bids had been discounted. She also asked about the minority business classification of Wiltec. Trent explained that the degree of experience was revealed during reference checks, which was why those bids were disregarded. He also said that Wiltec did not meet the minority business threshold of 10% of its workers being minorities, but that it would only be providing one person to the district, so it was not relevant.

Additional Second Briefing Items and Consent Agenda Approved

Two items, in addition to the naming of facilities, had been presented at the Jan. 20 board meeting and were presented again at Wednesday’s meeting for final consideration of the board: 1) the contracting with Great Lakes Environmental Services (GLES) to manage parking at Pioneer High School during University of Michigan football games, and 2) the replacement of computers in the business lab at Huron High School.

Susan Baskett asked Randy Trent, executive director of physical properties, whether GLES hires people as employees or contractors, and Trent confirmed that GLES hired people as employees and paid their taxes. Both items were approved as items included in the consent agenda of Wednesday’s meeting. The consent agenda also included the acceptance of two gift offers, and a resolution to hold two additional executive sessions in February (one for collective bargaining negotiations, and one for evaluation of the superintendent). [.pdf file of Feb. 3 board agenda]

Awards and Accolades

The board’s Feb. 3 meeting included numerous award and accolades – from the naming of facilities to a celebration of an AAPS-University of Michigan partnership.

Westfield-Sleeman Track and Lillie Gym Names Approved

Two naming proposals were approved at their second briefing.

Superintendent Todd Roberts bestowed “with great honor” the co-naming of the Pioneer High School track to Don Sleeman, introducing the coach as “a man who, for many people, needs no introduction.”

Coach Don Sleeman

Sleeman was on hand to accept the award, thanked the superintendent and all of his student athletes. “The thing that’s really gratifying is the fact that so many of them have gone onto various professions,” Sleeman said. “Whatever they did, they did with outstanding effort … and became very good at it.”

Glenn Nelson thanked Sleeman for all he’d done for the district and “innumerable” students. “It’s wonderful to recognize such an outstanding person,” Nelson said, adding that it was great that someone like Sleeman would choose to spend a 42-year career with the district. Irene Patalan said she could tell by Sleeman’s remarks to the board that he was always encouraging students.

Because Sleeman was in attendance, Deb Mexicotte entertained voting on the proposal immediately, instead of during the consent agenda later in the meeting. The motion was made by Susan Baskett, who offered, “As the wife of one of his former track stars, I’d be honored to make the nomination.”  The motion passed unanimously.

Tappan Middle School gym teacher Rob Lillie was also celebrated, with the naming of the Tappan gym in his honor. Superintendent Todd Roberts spoke briefly on behalf of Lillie, saying the award wasn’t just about his service as a physical education teacher and coach, it was his impact on shaping the lives of kids, and their kids, over 40 years.

The board unanimously approved Lillie’s award as an item on the consent agenda later in the meeting. Since Lillie is out of town, it was agreed that he would be invited to be personally congratulated by the board upon his return in March or April.

Celebration of Excellence and Gold Star Awards

The board periodically recognizes AAPS staff members who have excelled in either innovation or customer service with the Celebration of Excellence award, or who have done a good job within the realm of their responsibilities with a Gold Star award. At this meeting, both honors were awarded.

Donnetta Brown, a secretary at Huron High School, received a Celebration of Excellence award. Brown was lauded as the “heart of Huron,” and honored for her quality of attention, patience, and flexibility. She was nominated by her co-worker, Sharon Brown (no relation), with the statement, “Ms. Brown has provided support to a peer who was suffering from a serious illness, treating her as if she was her own family. She has been a source of comfort and assistance that has gone above and beyond the ‘outstanding customer service’ category. She has truly earned distinction as a loving hero.” Deb Mexicotte echoed that sentiment as a Huron parent.

Brown accepted her award, saying, “I’d just like to say thank you. I love working in AAPS, and I’m just glad to be of service.”

Mexicotte then announced the following Gold Star awards, and offered her congratulations to Jeremy Eldred and Mike Hogue of the information technology department, and to Cindy Johengen, a teacher at Allen Elementary School.

Youth Senate Update

Three high school students representing the Youth Senate gave a report to the board. They thanked the trustees for their “hard work, dedication, and perseverance,” and hoped that the board felt sufficiently acknowledged by the community during school board recognition month, which was in January. They also thanked the DTE Energy Foundation for a recent leadership development grant awarded to the Youth Senate. Lastly, they reported on the accomplishments of the Achievement Solutions Team currently meeting at Huron High School. The AST is a peer support group that works to eliminate achievement disparities – the students said that early reports show no AST students failing any classes last semester.

Appreciation of University Musical Society-AAPS Partnership

Both superintendent Todd Roberts and trustee Glenn Nelson expressed gratitude during Wednesday’s meeting for the relationship between AAPS and the University Musical Society (UMS). During his superintendent’s report, Roberts thanked UMS for hosting the annual partnership luncheon and performance, featuring Ladysmith Black Mamabazo. He lauded UMS for the many benefits it offers to AAPS students, and said it was a relationship of which the district could be proud.

Nelson delineated these benefits during the “Items from the Board” portion of the meeting. He noted the recent performance about Abraham Lincoln, choreographed by Bill T. Jones, that AAPS students were privileged to see, and noted that “the public performance was great, but the public did not get to see Jones doing his work – our students did. … How many people get to see a MacArthur fellow doing his work?” Nelson thanked UMS president Ken Fisher, saying “There are times when I get that same excitement of a learning experience that was like my own school experience. It’s exciting to be learning like K-12 students in your mid-6os.”

Additional Accolades

Also during his superintendent’s report, Todd Roberts congratulated various students and school communities on their recent accomplishments, including:

• Four Pioneer High School seniors who are candidates for a Presidential Scholar award.
• Skyline High School’s production of “The Midnight Caller,” which qualified to compete in a regional fine arts festival, despite being produced completely by freshmen and sophomores.
• Wines Elementary first family math night, attended by 188 people.
• 4th, 5th, and 6th graders who placed highly in the Knowledge Master Open.
• Many high ratings among musicians at all the high schools in the Solo and Ensemble Festival.
• Many school communities who raised thousands of dollars for Haiti.
• The fact that AAPS continues to need larger and larger venues for the National African-American Parent Involvement Day evening program, known as NAAPID at Night, and hosted by Skyline this year on Feb. 8, from 5:30-8:30 p.m.

Present: Deb Mexicotte, Irene Patalan, Glenn Nelson, Randy Friedman, Susan Baskett, Adam Hollier, Simone Lightfoot. Also present as a non-voting member: Todd Roberts, AAPS superintendent.

Next regular meeting: Feb. 24, 2010, 7 p.m., at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library 4th floor board room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

The second AAPS district budget forum will be held at Skyline High School on Tuesday, Jan. 12, starting at 6:30 p.m. (Photo by The Chronicle)

Several participants at the forum urged district administrators to look even more aggressively at how to generate additional revenue, whether through philanthropy, partnering with businesses, or other approaches.

So how does AAPS hope to generate extra dollars?

The line items in the budget draft list an additional 150 students in the Targeted Schools of Choice program plus an increase in Options Magnet enrollment of 20 students. Those 170 additional students would generate an additional $1.23 million in revenue, through the per-student allocation to school districts by the state.

At the AAPS Board of Education (BOE) meeting held the night before Thursday’s budget forum, several ways to increase school funding were discussed. Strategies include bringing out-of-district students into AAPS, as well as increasing the number of in-district students who are not currently enrolled in AAPS. BOE trustees heard a presentation Wednesday night on the Options Magnet program as part of that strategy.

Other strategies to increase revenue that were discussed at Wednesday’s board meeting include new partnerships with local community-based organizations, plus a statewide effort to compete for additional federal funding through the Race to the Top program.

Here, The Chronicle takes a closer look at these revenue-generating options outlined at the board’s Wednesday meeting.

Options Magnet Program

A featured item on Wednesday’s BOE agenda was a presentation by Susette Jaquette, coordinator of the Options Magnet program. The program is based out of two of Ann Arbor’s alternative high schools: Community High School, and Stone High School, and provides a menu of alternatives for earning high school credit beyond the traditional face-to-face classroom. It’s open to students residing within the AAPS district, as well as students throughout Washtenaw County who enter the Options Magnet program as a School of Choice.

Though the Options Magnet program was formalized just recently, in 2008, some components of the program have been around a long time, such as the Community Resource (CR) classes popular at Community High.

A CR class is described on the Community High website as “a contracted learning experience taught by an ‘expert’ member of the community.” The instruction is monitored by certified teachers, which ensures that students receive official high school credit for the experience. Examples of CR classes include: a wide variety of non-English language classes, silkscreening, public speaking, food science, African studies, ballroom dancing, fencing, history of jazz, sports literature, and internships in skeletal tissue engineering, counseling, and technology education.

A description of CR classes is provided in the 2009-10 Student Services Guide & Program of Studies, and they’re available to students districtwide. But trustee Susan Baskett remarked at Wednesday’s board meeting that the relative invisibility of CR classes to students outside of Community High makes them “the best kept secret in our community.”

Another element of the options program is dual enrollment. In 1996, Michigan passed a law that created the opportunity for high school students to take classes at local public or private colleges or universities if certain conditions are met.

On Wednesday night, a parent of an Options Magnet student who was previously exclusively homeschooled was invited to the podium by Jaquette to speak to the board. Her daughter has now taken classes at Eastern Michigan University, Washtenaw Community College, and the University of Michigan, and she reported: “There are so many rich resources in the community for learning … From a parent’s point of view, [the Options Magnet] is an empowering experience; I am empowered to help my daughter.” Another parent who spoke called the program a “godsend,” saying, “My son has the best of both worlds!”

In her presentation, Jaquette said that the Options Magnet will provide new efficiencies throughout AAPS as it continues to grow, particularly in the area of online classes. She reported that additional professional training undertaken last summer would allow many teachers now to offer some kind of online classes – either completely online classes, or “blended classes,” which combine some classroom time with an online component.

AAPS-developed online classes currently include self-paced math classes via a proprietary online software called Aleks, health classes using a technology called Moodle (an interactive website and collaborative content management system), and Michigan Virtual High School classes. One blended class is an American government class out of Huron High School, which primarily uses Moodle to interface with students, but requires some face-to-face attendance.

Other online initiatives at AAPS include “Evening Online at Stone” from 4-7 p.m., Tuesdays and Thursdays, at Stone High School. These online courses are aligned with AAPS curriculum and required for graduation, but are delivered via proprietary online software called E2020.

Sheila Brown, principal of Stone High School, gave a snapshot Wednesday night of some of the 24 students enrolled in the Options Magnet through her school. One of them is in a rehabilitation facility following a closed-head injury; several students have delivered babies and take online classes while home with their infants; one student is incarcerated; and a subset of students have day jobs to support their families, but take online classes in the evening. E2020 classes are also offered during regularly scheduled sections at three of the district’s high schools throughout the day, for students who have failed or withdrawn from a required class and need to recover the credit.

In addition to supporting elements of the AAPS strategic plan, such as creating individualized learning plans, and making efficient use of teachers’ time, Jaquette said that at least half of the 60 students currently enrolled in the Options Magnet would not be enrolled in AAPS at all if not for the program.

This additional enrollment is a benefit to AAPS, as public schools receive a specific dollar amount of state funding per pupil. Later in the Wednesday meeting, during his superintendent’s report, Todd Roberts stated that AAPS is currently receiving $9,723 per pupil from the state. (Though he also stated a new funding scenario will likely reduce that amount down to around $9,100.) So, adding 30 students to AAPS this year – even students who have never set foot in a district classroom – has translated to an extra $278,190 for AAPS.

Though the individual components of the Options Magnet program are currently available to all AAPS high school students, Jaquette’s goal over the next five to six years is to formally embed the program at each high school to streamline access to the full range of choices for high school course delivery. Jaquette closed her presentation by saying that while other districts are scrambling to create similar programs, AAPS should be proud of the vision it has shown, and the hard work it has put in to developing the many elements of the Options Magnet program over the years.

Board secretary Glenn Nelson commented that it’s inspiring to see such collaboration among students, parents, and schools. He also commended the BOE executive committee for including this presentation on the meeting agenda, saying “I hope our agenda continues to have room to celebrate.” Trustee Adam Hollier commended the Options Magnet program, and suggested that it could be used to close the achievement gap. Trustee Baskett and board president Deb Mexicotte both expressed their support for the program. Irene Patalan, the board’s vice president, praised the staff’s dedication to empowering students through this program.

2009-10 Grant Awards

Also on the meeting’s agenda was a report of the grants for the 2009-2010 school year, which totaled over $8 million. Linda Doernte, director of purchasing and business support services and grants for AAPS, made the presentation on grants.

Glenn Nelson listed some additional examples of grant-funded programs in the district. He said he hopes that people concerned with the salary costs of maintaining non-teaching staff in the district see the value in this type of work. Irene Patalan mentioned that the scope of these grants is huge, and appreciated the work of the grant writing staff.

Sharman Spieser, AAPS director of adult education (AE), then submitted her report, which highlighted the collaborative aspect of current AE programs, including $65,000 in new funding this year. Spieser asked AE’s community partners to introduce themselves, and talk about the ways they were collaborating with AE. Those partners included representatives from the Ann Arbor District Library, University of Michigan Hospital & Health Centers, Washtenaw County Jail, and Washtenaw Literacy. Spieser concluded her report with an invitation to “Come visit [AE classes] when you’re feeling down!”

Race to the Top

To provide some additional understanding on the BOE action taken on Wednesday in a bid to win federal dollars for AAPS, here is first a bit of background.

In February of 2009, the federal government passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), commonly known as the “economic stimulus bill.” Within ARRA were a set of provisions for one-time infusions of federal money into education, intended to meet four main goals:

1. Standardize curriculum and assessments;
2. Establish statewide data systems that track students from pre-kindergarten through college, and link students to teachers;
3. Revamp the teacher certification and evaluation processes, including tying student academic growth to teacher compensation; and
4. Intervene swiftly and effectively to either improve or close the lowest-achieving schools.

The main vehicle for these new infusions of funding is the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) – $53.6 billion intended primarily to shore up state education funding and prevent budget cuts for all levels, from kindergarten through higher education. Of the total amount funded, $48.6 billion is already being distributed among all states whose governors applied, and the remaining $5 billion is to be awarded through competitive grant processes.

Of that $5 billion, states are currently competing against each other for a share of the $4.35 billion Race to the Top Fund (RTTT), intended to “encourage and reward states that are implementing significant reforms in the four education areas described in the ARRA,” according to the U.S. Department of Education. The final $650 million will be competitively awarded directly to school districts or nonprofits with a strong record of results in improving education, as part of the federal Investing in Innovation Fund.

The second half of Wednesday’s BOE meeting was dominated by a discussion of AAPS’ role in the RTTT grant application being submitted by the state of Michigan. State grant applications to RTTT are due in Washington D.C. by Jan. 19, 2010. Superintendent Todd Roberts gave a brief description of the state’s education reform plan as it now stands.

He then explained that individual school districts have until this Friday to decide whether or not they will sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signaling local district support by AAPS for the reform plan outlined in the state’s grant application.

Signing the MOU has implications affecting whether a local district gets a share of Michigan’s RTTT money, if it’s awarded to the state. Signing the MOU also affects Michigan’s chances of getting an RTTT award.

Should Michigan be granted RTTT funds, only those districts that have signed an MOU would receive any of the money, and they’d need to spend the money within four years. Roberts estimated the AAPS share of the funds to be approximately $780,000, but that could change depending on the number of states awarded money and the size of the grants.

The federal scoring rubric for a state’s RTTT application includes a total of 500 points. Forty-five of those points depend on local support for a state’s reform plans. Those 45 local support points depend on inclusion of “as many as possible” signatures on the MOU from the president of the school board, the district superintendent, and the president of the teacher’s union.

Besides local support, the scoring rubric tries to measure a state’s efforts at reform to date. The RTTT application states:

It is important to emphasize that over half the points that reviewers may award to States are based on States’ accomplishments prior to applying – [including] … enlisting strong statewide support and commitment to their proposed plans, and creating legal conditions conducive to education reform and innovation.

At Wednesday’s board meeting, Roberts explained that waiting for the supportive legislation to pass, among other factors, has caused a delay in finalizing the state reform plan that’s a part of the RTTT application. This has led to somewhat of a timeline bottleneck during which districts are being asked to sign an MOU before having the final draft of the text to which they would be bound.

To mitigate concerns over this situation, Roberts explained, the state superintendent of schools had issued a statement assuring districts that they could terminate their MOUs at any point after signing, if they determine that participation is not in their best interest. For example, if a district determined that it was costing more to implement the RTTT initiatives than the funding it received, that district would be able to opt out.

As an action item at the BOE meeting, Roberts described two courses of action that could be followed. One would be to authorize district representatives (himself as the superintendent, and Deb Mexicotte as the BOE president) to sign the MOU immediately and forward it to the state. The second option would be to call a special meeting of the BOE by Jan. 12 to draft a “Letter of Intent” to sign the MOU once the state plan is finalized and the district has a chance to review it.

This Letter of Intent would still meet the state’s needs in terms of the grant application process, and would relieve the district of the burden of having to undo its MOU if it was later determined to be detrimental. Roberts stated that both options – the MOU, or the Letter of Intent – had legal support from district attorneys. He recommended passing a resolution to sign the MOU, with the rationale that it could be nullified in the future if necessary.

During a brief break in the meeting, Brit Satchwell, of the Ann Arbor Education Association, the local teachers’ union, talked with Roberts. Satchwell expressed his support for the Letter of Intent to sign the MOU – as opposed to signing the MOU before the text of the plan was finalized.

When the meeting resumed, Roberts elaborated for the board on the issue of the scoring metric. He outlined what was required for a district to be counted in a state’s tally of supporting districts, for purposes of its RTTT application. Roberts clarified for the board that the state of Michigan has decided it would accept MOUs from its districts without signatures from union leadership – MOUs needed to be signed only by the superintendent and the president of the school board.

Roberts also clarified that the flurry of legislation enacted by the Michigan legislature at the end of 2009 commits the state to engaging in this reform even if it is not federally funded. That legislation includes three House bills and two Senate bills, tie-barred collectively as “Race to the Top Education Reform.”

In brief, this legislation was designed to align Michigan’s education system more directly with the goals outlined in the ARRA. It calls for the creation of new “cyberschools,” and additional charter schools. It allows the state to more easily take over failing schools, even if that alters collective bargaining agreements. And it creates a statewide data system that ties student academic growth directly to teacher evaluation and compensation.

Trustee Simone Lightfoot expressed some concerns about RTTT, but stated that the opt-out option – described by the state superintendent of schools – made supporting the state plan more palatable. Mexicotte confirmed that an individual district can opt out, not only a countywide intermediate school district (ISD). Baskett asked for clarification on the timeline of implementing the elements of reform contained in the state plan, and Roberts clarified that the grant winners will be announced by the spring. Implementation work would happen over the next school year.

Hollier expressed support for RTTT, saying that the competition was “near to [his] heart” and that he believed AAPS and the state of Michigan to be well-positioned as an applicant. Nelson expressed support, but was wary of changes to the curriculum it would entail, and was concerned about the effect that ranking schools (in order to determine those “lowest-achieving”) could have within the district. Patalan supported the opportunity to bring a new infusion of money to the district, but expressed concern as well. She cited the Options Magnet program described at the beginning of the meeting as an innovation she hoped would not be “undone.”

Mexicotte asked if board treasurer Randy Friedman had any comments, and Friedman “called the question” – a procedural move intended to end discussion and bring the issue to a vote. Mexicotte asked him to withdraw his call of the question until the board could clarify which alternative was being moved – signing the MOU or drafting a Letter of Intent to sign the MOU. Friedman agreed to withdraw his motion to call the question, and Mexicotte prompted the board for a motion. Hollier made a motion to sign the MOU, seconded by Baskett. With no further discussion, the motion passed unanimously, with the votes of all seven trustees.

Upcoming Budget Forums

The superintendent’s report that concluded the main body of the meeting outlined the format for the January district budget meetings. Roberts noted that while he is hopeful that the budget shortfall won’t be as dire as initially projected, the AAPS is still planning cuts in the $18-$20 million range: “It’s a very unfortunate situation that we’re faced with this level of reduction.”

During his Ann Arbor Education Association report earlier in the meeting, Satchwell also pleaded with the community to get involved in the budgeting process:

Our school district is about to host what could be the most important meetings in the history of the district … The days of smaller, incremental compromises are past; we now need the public to climb the learning curve and provide guidance … We need you to tell us what matters most to you and your children, to make your priorities known, and to weigh them against what is now possible, to advise us as to what new directions we might take.

The slide presentation from the first budget forum, which took place on Thursday, Jan. 7 at Huron High School, is also available online. Remaining budget meetings are on Jan. 12 (Skyline High School), Jan. 14 (Scarlett Middle School), and Jan. 19 (Pioneer High School), each beginning at 6:30 p.m.

Present: Deb Mexicotte, Irene Patalan, Glenn Nelson, Randy Friedman, Susan Baskett, Adam Hollier, and Simone Lightfoot. Also present as a non-voting member was Todd Roberts, AAPS superintendent.

Next regular meeting: Jan. 20, 2010, 7 p.m., at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library’s fourth floor board room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]