Ann Arbor school board approves wording change on November ballot proposal
The Ann Arbor Public Schools Board of Education conducted a special meeting 8 a.m. Monday to change the language on a ballot proposal that will go before voters Nov. 5.
The original ballot proposal had been approved at the board’s Aug. 21 regular meeting, including a phrase that board members had added to the language prepared by its bond counsel.
The AAPS Board of Education met in a special meeting Monday morning to change language on a ballot proposal for a continuation of its sinking fund millage at the Balas Administration Building in Ann Arbor.
AnnArbor.com file photo
Tuesday is the deadline to submit language to the clerk’s office for the Nov. 5 ballot.
Initially, the school board had passed language Aug. 21 calling for a five-year renewal of its sinking fund millage that would take effect in 2015. The sinking fund is used annually by the district to pay for capital improvement and enhancement projects.
The tax is one mill levied on property taxes within the district that draws in about $7.5 million per year for physical property maintenance. The owner of a home with a taxable value of $100,000 pays about $100 per year.
Because the board had added the phrase “to the extent permitted by law, for other purposes, including but not limited to” to the ballot language, the proposal was technically not a “renewal” of the millage but a “continuation,” said board President Deb Mexicotte. Based on board procedure, a special meeting had to be called to change the wording to “continuation.”
The board voted 5-0 to approve the change in a 20-minute meeting Monday. Present were Trustees Simone Lightfoot, Andy Thomas, Vice President Christine Stead and Mexicotte, and Trustee Glenn Nelson cast his vote via teleconference. Trustees Irene Patalan and Susan Baskett were absent.
The following is the ballot language that will appear before voters, with the change that was approved Monday in bold and the phrase added by the school board Aug. 21 in italics:
“This proposal would continue and extend the authority last approved by voters in 2008 and which expires with the 2014 levy for the Public Schools of the City of Ann Arbor to levy a sinking fund millage. This proposal would also allow the use of proceeds of the millage for any purposes permitted by law.As a renewal of authorization which expires with the 2014 levy, shall the Public Schools of the City of Ann Arbor, County of Washtenaw, Michigan, be authorized to levy 1.00 mill ($1.00 per $1,000 of taxable valuation) to create a sinking fund for the purpose of the construction or repair of school buildings and the improvement and development of sites and, to the extent permitted by law, for other purposes, including, but not limited to, the acquisition and installation of furnishings and equipment, by increasing the limitation on the amount of taxes which may be imposed on taxable property in the School District for a period of five (5) years, being the years 2015 to 2019. It is estimated that 1.00 mill ($1.00 per $1,000 of taxable valuation) would raise approximately $7,450,000 in the first year that it is levied.”
Trustees were intent on making the language for the sinking fund millage broader in scope to accommodate for any potential changes in state law.
As Michigan law stands now, use of sinking fund millage is somewhat restricted. School districts can’t use the funds to pay for furniture, technology or salaries for teachers and administrators, for example.
“As funded has at least stagnated for some districts and declined quite a bit for many, there has been more discussion about how to support some things like transportation,” Stead said. “So that was one of the potential purposes of what the sinking fund could be used for. … We’ve had transportation on our list of cuts for the last three years in a row. I expect we’ll continue to have it on our list and we’ll continue to vet it.”
A package of bills introduced this spring by state legislators, including a bill from Rep. Adam Zemke, D-Ann Arbor, has the AAPS Board of Education hopeful that the use of sinking funds could be extended to pay for additional projects—including technology purchases and transportation.
Nelson and several other board members expressed their doubts that changes in state law regarding the use of sinking fund millage in school districts would pass this year.
“I don’t think it’s highly likely that this will pass this year, but if it ever does pass, we deny ourselves the opportunity to use that mechanism. I think our community would hold us accountable for that,” Stead said.
The following are projects that the district plans to fund in the future through its sinking fund millage:
- Replacement of turf on athletic fields, which is reaching the end of its 10-15 year lifespan
- Replacement of two nearly 30-year-old underground storage tanks at the transportation yard
- Replacement of a 25-year-old fiberglass storage tank at the Balas Administration Building
- Replacement of the original cooling tower equipment at Huron High School
- HVAC system upgrade
- Replacement of clocks, bells, announcement systems
- Roofing projects
- Paving projects
- Asbestos and lead abatement
- Replacement of all exterior doors
Amy Biolchini is the K-12 education reporter for AnnArbor.com. Reach her at (734) 623-2552, amybiolchini@annarbor.com or on Twitter.
Comments
JRW
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 2:53 a.m.
The answer is still NO. It doesn't matter how they massage the language. Same answer: NO. Until AAPS learns to live within its means, stops asking for more and more tax money while it refuses to make meaningful cuts at the administrative level, including principals' salaries, stops placing poorly performing expensive principals into administrative positions, and starts facing reality by consolidating schools and facilities, any reasonable resident of AA should vote NO. These repairs listed should be part of the regular budget. Where is the accountability on the sinking millage projects completed last year with costs, overruns, reasons for the overruns, etc. NO NEW TAXES (millages are taxes). Hire a new financial manager, and stop all the annual budget "surprises" (Oh, where did that xxx million dollar expense come from?). This district needs more transparency and needs to hire professionals to run the budget.
West Side Mom
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 12:05 a.m.
The spreadsheet provided by the district shows no planned capital projects for 2014. Just placeholders for the usual categories. This does not inspire confidence. Where is the Capital Improvements Plan? That should be driving the capital improvements budget.
RUKiddingMe
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 10:44 p.m.
First off, I think it would be great if voters pulled the reigns a tad and voted this DOWN. The school system has made it very clear that they are not responsible with money. Like at all. Really, they've been slapping us in the face with it over and over. It' really gotten quite ridiculous. Sadly, however, in Ann Arbor it seems like if it's for school (AKA "the kids"), it'll pass no matter what ridiculous in-your-face shenanigans they repeatedly perform. Given that, I think it would be a good idea if the citizens of Ann Arbor refused to vote yes until they REMOVE the "construction" part; this makes them able to build new buildings, which is NOT something they should be allowed to do. This district has too much money already; the problem is that they WASTE it, not that they don't have have it.
DonBee
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 10:28 a.m.
RUKiddingMe - Just exactly what was done with the new under the grandstand locker room and the new varsity only weight room. Thank you for pointing this out.
TheDiagSquirrel
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 10:18 p.m.
If AAPS refuses to release a COMPLETE, ITEMIZED LIST of EVERYTHING that they are asking money for, then we as voters should assume that the money isnt as important as they say it is, and the millage should be voted down.
DonBee
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 10:26 a.m.
TheDiagSquirrel - There is the "Trent" report that goes building by building and gives a laundry list of things the building wants done, it is over 100 pages in length. Most of the list in this article, is not in that building by building list (e.g. the external doors, new turf for athletic fields). The link was posted in a prior article. So i am not sure which list to believe, is it the building by building list, or the list above, or is there a third list that will actually get done?
Wake Up A2
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 7:09 p.m.
There was a reason Randy took the train. He didn't give folks the real picture of the district. Talk to the people who work in the district or the contractors.
Nicholas Urfe
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 6:27 p.m.
How can the troubled schools possibly have the budget to spend nearly a MILLION on a new athletic field at skyline when the existing grass is perfectly adequate?
kludwig
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 6:09 p.m.
As Michigan law stands now, use of sinking fund millage is somewhat restricted. School districts can't use the funds to pay for furniture, technology or salaries for teachers and administrators, for example." This is as it should be. We at least need to hear from our, yet again, new Superintendent about what we really need to fund from a sinking fund. Things that will last and directly benefit students. I think the new leadership should provide us with a comprehensive plan by next year including a complete overhaul of the way the schools budgets are reported so that they are transparent enough for lay people to understand.Making difficult things understandable is what teachers do, yes?
Charles Curtis
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 5:27 p.m.
Might as well stop asking for any specific details on what is planned and what the actual cost is, AAPS will not release that until they get sued. The spreadsheet is nice improvement, but still fails to show actual costs, and if over-runs occurred, what caused them? And if by miracle a project came in under budget, be nice to see that too. Be nice to see the planned projects (the projects planned for the renewed millage), specifically and estimated costs for each. Pushing all sports into rec/ed will be awful, rec/ed cannot deal with leisure players they have currently, and if serious sports players were to have to deal with them, I imagine lots moving elsewhere. The sports teach many things that do not get taught in classroom and those lessons learn while playing team sports carry on with student for rest of there lives, not sure you can say same thing for majority of classroom work. Music in study after study has shown to increase students mental ability to process and reason, and would be sorely missed if it got cut. People ought to spend more time attacking the michigan legislature about returning control of school funding back to local communities. Dont remember all the bankruptcies we have now when it was under local control. Bigger is not always better.
DonBee
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 10:24 a.m.
Mr Curtis - Let's think for a minute before demanding return to local control. If you think the lawsuit for 7th hour was a surprise, wait until the state returns funding to local sources, several organizations will file within hours of that happening, in Federal court. The result will be that a Federal judge will be in charge of collecting and distributing funds for schools. AAPS as a high performing district who now gets more than $2000 more per student from the state and more than $4000 per student from all sources than the median school in the state (and is in the top 15 public schools in the state for total per student budget) will end up at best at the median under a Federal judge and may - because the parents have more resources - at the low end of the funding scale. Leaving the district with between $4,000 and $6,000 per student less. Local control is nice to talk about and dream about, but funding will move almost immediately from state to local to federal control. It will take a matter of months for that to happen, and a Federal Judge may decide to force local districts to consolidate to improve local equality. Be very careful what you wish for, it may come true and you may not like the final result.
TryingToBeObjective
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 10:26 p.m.
Music is completely optional. Mandatory fifth and sixth grade music classes are ridiculous, and a huge waste of time and money. Most kids don't practice. Kids shouldn't be "mandated" to take music classes, particularly when few actually participate. The cost of instruments paid by the district would be eliminated f only the kids who wanted to participate did so. My experience- four kids through same schools- same problems every time.
AMOC
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 6:47 p.m.
The major difference between music and sports is that music classes grant academic credit. We may not need to spend quite so much on music perfomances outside of class, butboth vocal and instrumental music classes are important and should be kept. Students need exercise and to learn about their bodies and how to keep them healthy. That form of Physical Education also carries academic credit and should be kept. Sports are completely optional, and neither coaches nor extensive facilities not open to the whole community should be supported by school dollars.
DonBee
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:39 p.m.
I find it interesting that the "Skyline" bond contained projects to abate all Asbestos and lead in the district. I was told face to face on 3 times by 3 different administrators that this had to be done, that there was no choice but to get this out of the schools. Now I see it on the sinking fund list almost a decade later. What gives? If it was all done with the bond fund, then why is it listed for the sinking fund? I thought the underground tanks were taken care of in 2009 or 2010, yet I see them on the list. What are the 10 projects totaling $2.7 million in the report that is over 100 pages long that Mr. Trent provided in the sinking fund and capital needs, that are not explained with even 1 line of text in the 100+ page document? Inquiring minds would like to know. Are we being sold one set of projects, and then something else is done with the money?
Haran Rashes
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:19 p.m.
Thank you for the spreadsheet. However, the spreadsheet is for "projects planned from 2010-13 using the sinking fund. Do we know which of these projects were actually done? And if so, did they come in under or over budget. For example, the spreadsheet shows, what I presume is the North Athletic Field at Skyline costing $900,000 when AnnArbor.Com previously reported that it was going to cost $858,056. http://www.annarbor.com/news/education/ann-arbor-looks-to-install-synthetic-turf-at-skyline-high-school-practice-field/
pearlgirl
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:12 p.m.
I would have no problem renewing the sinking bond if athletics/team sports and career specific training were removed from public schools. Replace athletics with an improved curriculum that includes nutrition and health education. Put athletics in city recreation departments or private industry. Specific job training should be provided through unions and private industry. Let's focus our tax dollars on education: reading, writing, mathematics, science, language, health education, art and music. These courses provide the foundation for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
say it plain
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 2:56 a.m.
@TryingToBeObjective, I say let 'em move! I agree that despite the rational position @AMOC and @pearlgirl are taking here, there's little chance in this country that it would be done. Other developed nations have sports done at the level of community and not school-based, but we don't like change and sports are so very deeply engrained in our ideas about school. Not to our benefit at all, as our educational attainment levels indicate.
TryingToBeObjective
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 9:52 p.m.
AMOC, not a chance. If AA were to shift all athletics to Rec and Ed, those 1/3 would either move, or go private, if they could afford it. We don't need extra PE classes for an easy "A". AA would NEVER let it happen. Of course for those whose kids can't or won't play sports, there's Rec and Ed, or a television.
AMOC
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 6:53 p.m.
TTBO - Removing athletics would send the majority of students to private schools? I don't think so. Even according to AAPS' inflated number of "student athletes" caused by counting every slot on every team as an individual participant, about 1/3 of students currently participate in school sports. Of those, much less than half would be able to find slots in the local private schools, because their parents can't afford tuition and transportation. We should move ALL team sports / competitive athletics to Rec and Ed and make keep self-supporting while simultaneously improving the PE program so most students get exercise during most school days.
TryingToBeObjective
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:34 p.m.
With your argument, art and music should be moved to "Rec and Ed" as well. Many kids have zero interest in music classes. Physical education is required by the state. Health education and nutrition are already part of the curriculum. Athletics and team sports are part of school culture, and ARE part of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. If your kid has no athletic ability, thats what rec and Ed is for- sports for leisure. Eliminating athletics would move the majority of students to private schools, and negatively impact property values by a mass exodus. Never happen.
Goober
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:04 p.m.
Oh why not. We have very deep pockets in Ann Arbor. We are also apathetic voters. Only those that want to see this pass will show up to vote. Go figure!
demistify
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:49 p.m.
"The owner of a home worth $100,000 pays about $100 per year." This ploy to minimize the hit to the taxpayer is deplorable, albeit not uncommon. Are there any houses in Ann Arbor that cost only $100,000 ? If you want to illustrate a typical cost, about three times that would be appropriate.
BobbyJohn
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 2:17 p.m.
At least in Ann Arbor, there are very few homes that are selling for $200,000 or under
Sparty
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 7:40 p.m.
It's already being paid .... it's a CONTINUATION.
Basic Bob
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 6:12 p.m.
There are lots of homes in the district with a $100k taxable value. Many are outside the city where the tax assessors are more realistic in their determination of actual value.
J. A. Pieper
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:32 p.m.
And, what some people forget is that this is in addition to other cost initiatives that may be presented at the same time, so it can be a higher tax hit than the supposed $100 to our escrow payments! Everyone out there wants a little piece of the pie, and taxpayers are left with increasingly smaller pieces of that pie!
Amy Biolchini
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:26 p.m.
Good point to raise—it should read "a home with a taxable value of $100,000." I've edited the story accordingly.
Stephen Landes
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:49 p.m.
And the answer is............NO. No more money until the AAPS come to the realization that they cannot continue this top-heavy, over-compensated, administration. No more expensive "national" searches for a superintendent. No more staff devoted to "curriculum development". No more "athletic directors" for each high school. If all of this spending was doing something to address the needs of the children there would be no achievement gap and no low placement on the new State scorecard. What we are doing is NOT working. Stop all the overspending and start focusing on teachers and students. Once that is done I will start supporting milages again, but not until I see someone really take an ax to the bloated bureaucracy so we can focus on the issue - the relationship between teachers and students.
JRW
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 2:46 a.m.
Totally agree.
chapmaja
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:26 p.m.
The school door replacement issue was covered in an article the other day. AAPs wants to install increased security mechanisms for the schools to prevent situations such as what recently happened in Georgia or in Sandy Hook. These doors would have very limited building access and would either require a key tag to be used for entry, a special code to be entered or someone on the inside of the building to buzz the door open when someone requests entry. I know of only one school using the buzz in method, and it has worked in the past. IIRC a few years a person who was not allowed on school property was trying to get into a building. The office staff refused to buzz him into the building. The deputy assigned to the schools drove up on the sidewalk, past me as I was walking toward the building, and stopped just in front of him. He was arrested for trespassing. When he was arrested the office asked if he had any weapons on him, and it turned out he had a rather substantial sized knife in his pocket as well. These doors do work to prevent unauthorized entry into the building, which given school safety is worth the money.
sh1
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 10:19 p.m.
Except that school windows still need to be opened so the kids don't overheat.
A2Realilty
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:25 p.m.
I'd rather see more things paid by special millages where we can spend our local tax dollars directly on the school system in Ann Arbor rather than throw it out to everyone in the entire state.
Nicholas Urfe
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:15 p.m.
How much is being spent on athletic fields? Especially fields that are off-limits to mere students and only available to after school sports. What exactly is being paved, and at what cost?
M.Haney
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 5:13 p.m.
I believe the turf field at Skyline was an additional new turf field, not a replacement.
chapmaja
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:16 p.m.
I know the field at Skyline that is having turf installed gets a lot of use. It is used for PE classes, it is used as a practice field for soccer, football, and several other sports. It has gotten dangerously worn down in previous years, and will be well suited as a turf field
chapmaja
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:14 p.m.
Amy, they are not replacing a turf field at Skyline. They are installing a new turf field at Skyline, which is the 900K cost. This field is located inside the track area of the facility, which was not a turf field previously. The cost to replace a turf field is not nearly as expensive as it is to put in a new field. These fields are designed to be "replaced" every 10-15 years, which basically is pulling all the rubber pieces up, pulling to the base, checking, fixing the drainage underneath, putting new rubber and rubber pieces down. The only time this would be close to 900K? for a field replacement is if there was a major structural problem at the field. These fields are costly to put in, but are well worth the cost in the maintenance needed and the reduced risk of injury. Unlike a grass field it is unlikely to have cleats get stuck in these fields causing serious knee or ankle injuries. These also don't require regular grass mowing or painting like grass fields do. The only regular yearly maintenance required is clearing of the drain pipes (which get rubber pieces blocking them), and tamping the field, which just resettles the base rubber pieces.
blueplatespecial
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:08 p.m.
How can the Skyline fields be nearing the end of their useful life of 10-15 years? This, once again, demonstrates a lack of oversight and honesty in how money is allocated and spent in AAPS.
Goober
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:07 p.m.
Oh, why not. We have very deep pockets and love to waste money.
Amy Biolchini
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:36 p.m.
I've added a link to an Excel spreadsheet near the beginning of the story that gives a line-item budget of all projects planned from 2010-13 using the sinking fund millage. As an example, replacing a turf field at Skyline would cost about $900,000.
chapmaja
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:32 p.m.
The school athletic fields are likely going to be several hundred thousand dollars, which is a lot of money. One thing to consider though is the cost to the district if a player, coach, official, or student becomes injured as a result of an unsafe playing field surface. The lawsuit could easily cost the district more money than the cost to fix the fields. I don't know which fields they are planning on fixing, but many of them are in very poor shape and do pose an injury risk to participants in their current state. Many of these facilities are used by the students in physical education classes as well as being used for sports teams. If a student gets hurt in a PE class because of a poor field, the school is opened up to serious liability issues. As for the parking lots being paved. That is a good question. I know some schools have lots that are in need of repair.
Jim Osborn
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:14 p.m.
I wonder if a .75 mill would be more appropriate? "All doors need to be replaced?
Mike
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 2:45 p.m.
Shorten the time frame to accommodate changes in state law and then you can vote on new language in two years instead of 2019
chapmaja
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:27 p.m.
Or put in the proposal "for any purposes provided by law" and you don't have to approach voters again, you have the proposal extending through 2019 and the money can be used for any purpose provided by law at the time the money is spent.
Mick52
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 2:33 p.m.
I can see a need to make improvements but I wonder what and why "Replacement of all exterior doors" is on this list. I have passed through many school doors and I see no need anywhere to replace a door. What is up with that?
West Side Mom
Tue, Aug 27, 2013 : 12:03 a.m.
The doors were supposed to be a Summer 2013 project. I thought the doors at Forsythe looked different today, which leads me to believe that the exterior door project is done. Since the district knew about Sandy Hook when it undertook the project, I would hope that security issues were addressed as part of that project and we are not talking about trashing $800K worth of doors.
Amy Biolchini
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:28 p.m.
According to the planning document released by AAPS that I've added a link to in the article, replacing exterior doors would cost about $800,000.
J. A. Pieper
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:16 p.m.
I would like to replace my doors for aesthetic reasons also, but since they are quality, and secure, it is not a choice that I can financially make at this time. Security is important, but for the district to indicate in any way that some doors need to be replaced for aesthetic reasons is ridiculous!
Chucky
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 4:12 p.m.
Maybe security related in that the new doors will have an auto lock/unlock feature that can be controlled from the office. I believe a lot of them have to be manually locked/unlocked. But I could be totally wrong - it'd be nice if they gave a little more info.
Amy Biolchini
Mon, Aug 26, 2013 : 3:29 p.m.
District officials have said the doors need to be replaced for security and aesthetic reasons.