DonBee

Wed, Mar 24, 2010 : 5:34 p.m.

Jack - I remain anonymous because I can not run for office, to stay in Michigan I have to work elsewhere, that does not work for normal government meetings. Because of the level of work I do, and the sensivity of some of it, I would, if named, have to stop posting here because of job considerations. I suspect that the bulk of the cuts that will be announced will be teacher related. I also suspect that they will focus on class room and student facing teachers and that administrators and principals will get a free pass. If the cuts go elsewhere, I will be happily surprised. I wish we did not have to cut at all, I wish we had an unlimited budget, I wish we all had good jobs and taxes were not an issue. I wish... We don't and based on the unfunded mandate that Washington just passed, the state needs to reach in and find another $400 million a year to cover what Washington DC did to them. that is $400 million more than they needed to cut before. We can choose to peal the onion one layer at a time and cry about it as we go, or we can take the bull by the horns and make the deep structural changes that need to happen. I agree AAPS is an excellent (but not great) school system. The question I would ask is - don't all the students in Michigan deserve that level of education? Shouldn't we try to provide it? Or should excellent education be reserved in the county for those people who can afford to live in the Ann Arbor School District?

Ram

Wed, Mar 24, 2010 : 4:14 p.m.

DonBee, Jack, Steve, others: I know this discussion can get heated sometimes, but it is the dedication of citizens like you that make America the nation that it is. You each bring a different perspective to the issue and that is what makes such a discussion worthwhile. The reluctance to take our government at face value, the desire to do your own research, is what makes us constantly evolve as a nation. Remember, government in America is supposed to be we the people, not a separate entity. I applaud all your efforts to work towards finding a solution to today's problems.

DagnyJ

Wed, Mar 24, 2010 : 2:56 p.m.

Andrew Thomas: If non-Asian minority percentage were the only factor associated with student performance, then I would agree. But in fact parents' education and social class (ie. HH income) also matter greatly. So without that data, I don't think you can really draw any conclusions about Ann Arbor's need for such a low student-teacher ratio compared to Plymouth-Canton.

Jack Panitch

Wed, Mar 24, 2010 : 12:55 p.m.

"Things that Make You Go Hmmmm." While we are all waiting for the revised budget, the resulting news story, and the next round of "conversation," I thought I would turn the silence into a teachable moment, pedant that I am. Up above in the commentary, a blogging colleague used the phrase "throw a hat in the ring" to refer to ideas he had floated for consideration. This was a bit of a disconnect, as my colleague blogs under a pseudonym. The very essence of throwing your hat in the ring is that you cannot do it anonymously. And while I think we all knew what he was trying to say at the time, the slip is worth pondering. The phrase, "threw his hat in the ring" originates from boxing, and it is a challenge to all comers. The "ring" is the boxing ring, and throwing your hat in means that you will take on anyone in the crowd brave enough to face you. The phrase was coopted by politicians and now means running for public office. You can't run for public office anonymously. Even an esteemed former member of the Board of Education, who tried to regain anonymity by attempting to take his name off the ballot cannot be said to have been elected anonymously. Andy Thomas and I have thrown our hats in the ring twice now and gotten our lights punched out each time. Upon running for office in the 60's Shirley Temple is reported to have said that she was throwing her curls in the ring. The point is this quintessentially American phrase has a very specific meaning. Draw your own conclusions, but I offer up this light fare solely for its entertainment value, while we wait for the real work and the real conversation to begin again.

Andrew Thomas

Tue, Mar 23, 2010 : 10:29 a.m.

Dagney: No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm simply presenting some objective data and suggesting some possible interpretations of that data. I don't have the definitive answer, and never said I did. However, there is a great deal of data that demonstrates that a district's performance on standardized test scores is negatively correlated with the percentage of non-Asian minority students in that district. So for two districts of similar size but dissimilar minority populations to have essentially the same test scores would suggest that the more diverse district has been devoting at least some additional resources to meet the needs of minoritty students.

DagnyJ

Tue, Mar 23, 2010 : 6:44 a.m.

Andrew Thomas: So you are saying if you have "diverse" students, then you need more teachers, aides, etc? A number of teachers in AAPS will say privately that there is a ton of waste in the system, lots of places that could be trimmed. Another thought: Maybe there are so many teachers because rather than work to improve failing teachers, AAPS just hires new ones.

Andrew Thomas

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:51 p.m.

DonBee and Steve, Here's some research that might shed a little light on your discussion. Here are some comparitive figures for Ann Arbor and Plymouth-Canton (I took these from the "EducationBug.org" web site). Ann Arbor Plymouth-Canton Students 16,701 18,121 Student/teacher ratio 15.9 20.4 Caucasian 68.1% 80.9% African-American 15.4% 5.1% Hispanic 3.6% 1.8% Total non-Asian minorities 19.4% 7.3% Full-time teachers 1,055 890 Guidance counselors 40 28 LEA administrative 14 13 LEA staff 9 4 School administration 55 43 School admin support 152 117 Student services staff 60 56 Other support staff 418 349 Media specialists 33 18 Instructional aids 228 117 Instructional coordinators 66 22 (I apologize for not getting the columns to format correctly -- I haven't figured out the trick of doing this on the A2.Com web site). In order to keep this post relatively short, I am not including MEAP scores for the two districts, but if you are willing to take my word for it, I can report that there isn't a gnat's hair of difference between the two districts for any level from 3rd grade through 9th grade. Both districts consistently scored in the low to mid 90s over the past five years. So here is a summary of a comparison of the two districts: 1. Ann Arbor has a significantly lower student-teacher ratio 2. Ann Arbor is a significantly more diverse district 3. Across the board, Ann Arbor has a much richer mix of personnel 4. Both districts have achieved virtually identical achievement as measured by the MEAP So, on the surface, it does appear that Plymouth-Canton is providing an educational system with results as good as Ann Arbor with far fewer staff. The counter argument to this is that Ann Arbor is a much more diverse district and needs to devote additional resources to its minority students. I would add the caveat that there is no way of comparing the "richness" of the educational opportunities offered by each district, i.e. number and range of electives, etc. Also missing from this analysis is the number of special ed students for each district. I think you both know my perspective on this: I would like to preserve the Ann Arbor schools in their present form as much as possible in the face of the budget gap. Still, as I look at these numbers, I have to wonder whether we are really getting much bang for the additional bucks we are spending in this district? Let's keep the discussion as factual as possible, and try not to be so testy in your back-and-forth. Both of you have excellent points.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:30 p.m.

DonBee, I'm not discounting local, county or Federal funding. In fact, most of that would filter through the General Fund. Bulletin 1011 shows data for other special funds, most of which make tiny contributions to COE except for the item "special revenue funds" which was about $500 per pupil in FY08. The report from FY03 did not report any expenditure amounts for any funds other than the General Fund, so I felt that comparing those two data points would be the best approach. But nearly all of the money you are talking about would be included in that total. Most of what is excluded would be funds used for capital spending, which by law must be separate and cannot be used for operations. I suppose this capital spending "counts," but unless you believe we can turn plumbing fixtures into textbooks, including capital spending as a measure of education spending is simply misleading. That money is simply not available for any operating purpose. And if you are familiar with the sorry extent of AAPS's "deferred maintenance" in the period before 2004, you will know that most of these capital funds would NOT have been spent out of operating funds if the bond and sinking fund millages had not passed. I don't know how the Census Bureau got the data, but since it must have come from State sources, I think it's best to go to the original material. Bulletin 1011 shows precisely the data you seemed to be interested in. The Census numbers you quote don't seem to match any of the data series I was able to look at from the MDE, which, as I say, must have been the original source. I also note that our growth figures for personal income are very close, so I don't think there is any argument there. Lastly, there is no trap. You are the one who suggested the comparison with Plymouth-Canton, so I think the burden rests on you to show that the comparison is meaningful.

Jack Panitch

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:17 p.m.

DonBee: I dont want good schools: I want excellent schools. I found them right here in Ann Arbor under the current administration and Board of Education Trustees. AAPS is one of the best school systems in Michigan, right here, right now. There is always room for improvement in any organization. But anyone who wants to offer up radical changes now is either a misguided defeatist or ideologically my adversary. So assuming your sincerity, do you really believe that suggesting consolidation as part of a radical measure to save costs is appropriate? That's the Whipple. The current bleeding calls for more than a strategically applied tourniquet, but much less than the radical procedure you suggest. Don't get me wrong: someone has to do the strategic crystal-twisting to figure out what the results of consolidation would look like if things get really, really grim. But are you willing to give up what we have now without any kind of fight, just because you think you know the inevitable future? If so, youre not exactly Braveheart, and you have lost me from the outset. And you dont really think that cutting teachers or teachers salaries is an easy way out for the Board and the administration, do you? Thats an idea you will need to articulate more fully. Tomorrow, the District is likely to reveal its refined budget plan. Well have more specifics to talk about then. We may even get a glimpse of what has been happening in the collective bargaining process. In the meantime, we can both think about our true objectives and try our best to come at it again with integrity in the new day.

DonBee

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 9:01 p.m.

Steve - So all the local and county and federal money for the schools does not count? So AAPS does not need or use this money and it should be returned to the taxpayers? Your numbers are misleading at best. Yes, as I admitted the state has not keep up and your numbers for this sub-segment of money are correct, but the total money from all sources is up by more than 26 percent. Local support in the state (County and Local Millage) more than doubled. Do you not want the support at the local and county level Steve? Denying that it exists and you and Glenn continue do to will only lead to problems with future local millages. Is that what you really want? The Census numbers look at all people in the state and all income, These are the best numbers available. I asked several people in the business, including at the state and federal level, as well as the library - they all pointed me at those numbers. Plymouth-Canton has about 40 percent of the principals that AAPS does and reasonable test scores. As to effectiveness, I am not walking into that trap, you have already baited me once on evaluation and testing. I will leave it to you to provide the metrics for effectiveness.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 8:35 p.m.

@stunhslf Yes, I agree that Michigan's manufacturing sector has been hit terribly hard. Michigan is also more dependent on that sector than nearly any other state. I strongly suspect that those jobs, especially the well-paying jobs that require only a high school diploma, are gone for good. Does it then make sense to cut back on schools as much as we cut back on everything else? Or do we scrimp to keep our schools strong to make our communities attractive today and to give our children options for tomorrow? DonBee, I'm not sure that Census data is the best for this. Glenn Nelson's numbers (and mine) use the State's calculation of total personal income that is required by the Headlee Amendment (to calculate the state revenue limit). In any case, here are the numbers I found: Michigan personal income, total: 2002 - 303,009.1 million 2007 - 343,585.1 million; change 13.2% Michigan average per pupil General Fund "current operating expenses": 2002-03 - 7,907 2007-08 - 8,922; change 12.8% (The FY08 data included figures for all funds, but the FY03 data only show expenditures routed through the General Fund, so I used that data point for both.) Michigan Dept of Education, Bulletin 1011 http://www.michigan.gov/mde/0,1607,7-140-5235_6539-21539--,00.html Senate Fiscal Agency report on personal income http://www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa/Economics/MichiganPersonalIncome.PDF (Not sure what data series the Census used for per pupil expenditures, since they must have gotten it from MDE.) But the point here really is that spending on education is MOST important when the economy is tanking. Otherwise we cut our best lifeline. Note also that income inequality has been increasing in Michigan, making a graduated income tax a better option than our current flat tax. As to the millage, the state law calls it an "enhancement" millage, because the authors assume that regular state funding would be sufficient for normal purposes. In the campaign, we made it clear that no "enhancement" would be possible until state funding cuts stopped. The millage was explicitly an attempt to head off the kind of draconian cuts we are experiencing now. OK, I'll bite: since you have researched the Plymouth-Canton district, how is it that they spend less on principals? Do they pay them less? Do they have fewer of them? And in either case, does that mean that they get the same "bang for the buck" that we do? Measured how? There is no "magic" to new revenues. All it takes is community commitment and political will.

DonBee

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 7:56 p.m.

Jack - I guess your sense of humor and mine are different. I am putting most of my free time into this, trying to sort out what is going on. I want AAPS to be one of the best school systems for children, I am worried that the answers to the current issues will be cut teachers - not the answer that I would like to see, but the easy way out for the board and the administration. I have tried to be open and honest all the way through with no hidden agenda and openly posting the numbers I can find and issues that I have found, warts and all. I have taken my lumps, all of them deserved. Under it all I think we want (at least I hope we do) the same thing, good schools that are focused on students. Am I wrong?

DonBee

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 7:49 p.m.

Steve - 1) I never said hold the school administration or principals harmless, I have said over and over we are overstaffed in both these areas. Principals account for more than $12 million in the budget and AAPS spending on Principals is more than double that of Plymouth-Canton, they have more students. The savings from getting to the same amount is about $6 million, more than enough to not outsource the bus drivers or the custodians, or to fill about 1/3 of the hole in the budget. AAPS overran their energy bill by almost $1 million in 2008-9 - a year where natural gas and electricity prices in the state trended down - no one has explained how this happened. Consolidation of bussing - according to AAPS's own study $1.5 million. Cutting 2 athletic directors (to match Plymouth-Canton again) - $300,000; Figuring out why the cost from school to school for maintenance varies so heavily probably another $100,000 in reduced supplies. Centralizing services at the WISD and leveraging the ability to increase volume on purchasing of supplies and outsourced services - say 5 percent on the supplies and services and 20 percent on the central services - an other $1 million plus. There is 1/2 the $20 million without consolidation of districts. Doing away with 7 of the 10 school boards and administration teams in the county would cut another 4 to 7 million (a guess - AAPS is $1.6 million). It is time to talk honestly about how we make the structural cuts that will let the schools do well in 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 - the time that it will take, if the economy comes roaring back, for the state equalized valuations to return to their 2008 levels. If the economy does not come roaring back, it will take even longer and be even more painful. 2) Having read the link on spending it is not complete, it looks only at a part of the total. If I go to the US Census Bureau and look at the numbers there: Per Capita Income in 2002 for Michigan: $30,188 and a ranking of 23 (this is the oldest financial data on the AAPS website) Per Capita Income in 2007 for Michigan $ 34,188 and a ranking of 39 (this is the newest education spending data on the Census Bureau web site). Total per capita increase in income 13.3 percent For education (again from the Census Bureau - one consistant source). Per Pupil Spending in 2002 for Michigan - $8,987 rank 14 Per Pupil Spending in 2007 for Michigan - 11,376 rank 16 Total Per Student Increase in spending 26.5 percent So spending per student is double the increase per capita income. the state fell 16 places in income but only 2 in per student spending - I think we have done very well compared to the rest of the nation. Maybe not good enough, but better than most. 3)Now if you purely talk about the state money, you and Glenn are correct, it did not keep pace, but the increase in local spending for schools more made up for the lack of improvement in state money. 4)Even if the enhancement millage (which was to add programs, not replace missing state money when it was created) had passed, we would still have a budget hole. The hole will not go away after next year, and may even get worse. Instead of an honest discussion of consolidation of services and/or districts, you seem to think that by magic more money will appear, but it can not be bond money or sinking fund money or special education money - since you have said repeatedly that these funds do not count in your posts.

stunhsif

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 7:38 p.m.

@SteveNorton, You just don't get it. The famous Mark Scott quote: They don't know and they don't know that they don't know!!!! This state is still at least several years away from hitting the bottom of the lake. Tax revenues are still going to go down. If teachers get their pay cut ( whatever %) it may stay that way for 10 years. The private sector has been heading south since the year 2000 in this state. I have not had a raise in 4 years, no contribution to my 401k ( it was a whopping 500 bucks a year), my healthcare costs have tripled, my copay for drugs in now 30 dollars. My pay was cut a year ago to keep the company afloat. There is no way in this state to raise revenues, costs must be reduced. What don't you understand. GM and Chrysler both filed bancrupcy this past year. Lear Automotive, Delphi Corporation, Metaldyne Corporation, Dura Corporation, Tower Automotive, Collins&Aikman Automotive,and other Michigan based automotive companies have filed bancrupcy in the past 4 years. The above companies have shed hundreds of thousands of jobs in Michigan in the past 10 years. Yes, the MEA needs to pull their head out of the sand and get with reality, and there will be no millages passing in this state until that happens.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 5:51 p.m.

@aataxpayer, It's not that I never address pay cuts, it's just that I want to show that there is no magic way to cut school budgets without somehow cutting pay or programs. So either we ask teachers to take pay cuts, or we have fewer of them. This is the real tradeoff which many opponents of the millage, especially the primary "no" campaign, sought to hide by claiming we could make sufficient cuts without touching teachers or classrooms. The second point (not addressed in my response to DonBee), is whether cutting teacher pay or programs is a good idea. Some people, yourself included, clearly think teachers should be paid less. I disagree, because I think it sends the wrong signal about what our priorities are. Clearly there has to be some give, but I wouldn't blame teachers for wondering if the other half of the "deal" will ever happen. What if they do take 7% or 10% pay cuts? And then a new county millage does not pass, and the legislature fails to find any new money for schools. DonBee is correct that, absent changes in our tax code, funding for schools will remain stagnant even if the economy picks up. Private sector employees can hope that they will benefit from a recovery; school employees would not, for years. What would you do in their shoes? And do we really want our children taught by people who feel their careers are going downhill? My argument in each case is that we need to give a priority to education. That's why I worked for the millage campaign, which would have headed off most (but not all) of these cuts. The budget cuts will bring some "efficiencies," but an awful lot will simply be degrading service: larger classes, higher caseloads, fewer electives, etc. etc. The real issue isn't so much this next budget. It's what we're going to do now that will allow us to protect our good schools from being dismantled over the next few years. Once it's been taken apart, it will take years to put it back together again (you need skilled, experienced professionals, an organizational culture that fosters excellence, etc). You can't do this overnight, so it's better to avoid taking it apart at all, if there is any alternative.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 2:04 p.m.

On consolidation of services: Well, I can't find online the paper report I have of all the services coordinated at the ISD level, but you will find many of them in this document, the WISD's annual services report: http://wash.k12.mi.us/files/Word/SSREPORT.pdf Among these initiatives are the substitute teacher contracting and calling system, bus maintenance parts purchasing, and so on. Moreover, as AAPS officials made clear at the January budget meetings, they are exploring consolidating transportation across most or all WISD districts. I understand that this process has borne fruit. On the share of personal income going to K-12 education: Data for overall spending from state and local sources is my own, and I have not had a chance to put it up on the MIPFS web site. On the whole, this is not something most policymakers want to advertise, so you will not find it on the state web sites. However, you will find an analysis of state School Aid spending as a percent of personal income in this article authored by economist and BoE member Glenn Nelson: http://www.a2cmc.org/node/38 Yes, this was prepared for the millage campaign, but the facts remain the same. Data is attached. DonBee, you say: Yes, Steve, I am pushing to see something done that does not result in all the cuts focused on Teachers and student facing staff. Really? OK, then let's say that teachers, school principals, school office staff, bus drivers and custodians are held harmless. Must be lots of fat to cut in central admin, right? Well, in another nice piece penned by Glenn Nelson for the CMC, the different categories of AAPS spending are broken down. (His analysis refutes the absurd claims based on state data that 40% of our spending is "administrative." The state data counts all principals, school office staff, bus drivers, custodians and ANYONE who is not directly teaching students as "administration." Hardly what we think of when we think administration, though.) In the article, Dr. Nelson writes: The remaining accounts apply to central administration. General Administration includes the superintendent and his core staff and the Board of Education ($1.6 million). Business Services and Central Activities include those services related to payroll, procurement, human resources, research and evaluation, and other similar services ($5.7 million). These two accounts total $7.3 million or 4 percent of total operating expenditures. http://www.a2cmc.org/node/39 In other words, if we eliminate ALL central administrative functions in the process of consolidating districts (who will do payroll? who will keep the books? who will hire staff?), we still only carve out about $7 million. Right now we need to find $20 million. Your contention that there are "real changes" which no one has yet suggested is a fallacy, based on a wishful hope that we can provide the same level of education for less money. That was the same fantasy the millage opponents successfully sold. But is was not, and is not, real. As to the contention that there is no money, well, there could be - if we want it. The millage would have generated income. An expanded sales tax or a graduated income tax (proposals now floating in Lansing) would generate income. You are right that taxable values of property will not recover anytime soon. This simply makes the revenue question more important. Now it is one thing for people to say: "OK, I don't want to raise my taxes, so yes, I'm willing to live with a less good school system." Then, at least, we'd be honest about the tradeoff. But to say: "No, don't raise my taxes - I know you can keep things the same if you would only enact these 'big changes' everyone knows about," well, that's betting a lot that the people who keep talking about "big change" are right. All I see is lots of talk from anonymous posters. Again, I say: you can always make things cheaper, but it's rare that you can make them better at the same time. What do we want from our schools, and are we willing to pay for it? If not, fine, but let's not kid ourselves that everything will be just dandy, or that we'll be able to put Humpty Dumpty back together again in a year or two. I'm not ashamed of anything I have written; I do my best to get the facts right and to be intellectually honest. Does the same go for everyone else here?

Jack Panitch

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 1:09 p.m.

DonBee: No one is mocking you. The use of humor to get a point across does not mean that the speaker is making fun. I'm just asking you to maintain focus on the objective as you offer your ideas. I think you are fundamentally wrong in your approach: we self-evidently do not need radical change, and the achievement numbers and news stories show it by any measure. What we need are the targeted cuts Dr. Roberts has proposed and will modify shortly. We need them in order to maintain excellence. And we will have to have the patience necessary to keep doing it year to year with our focus on the main objective: an excellent education for all students. Because once excellence is diminished, the downward spiral starts.

DonBee

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 12:28 p.m.

Jack - I am not a lawyer or a doctor, nor do I play one on TV. I don't know latin and I am not going to respond to your ploy, Sorry. As to creditials I don't have any that you will not mock, but I have had responsibility for large budgets and facilities in my life. Steve- As to Steve's comments - Steve - you state that as a percentage of income the support of schools is down - with no links, no numbers and no support, shame on you. Once again you are fact free and supposition full. I would love a link to the WISD web site that shows consolidation of purchasing - as of Saturday when I posted my comments, it was not there, I went to the site map and looked at every link. I have not seen this discussed on any of the AAPS board meetings that are broadcast in replay on cable. So once again, supposition, no support. All - Yes, Jack I threw a hat in the ring to change the discussion from the paper cuts to real reform, Yes, Steve, I am pushing to see something done that does not result in all the cuts focused on Teachers and student facing staff. I don't see either of you offering any real choices here, nor do I see the AAPS board offering real changes. The administration has hundreds of paper cuts that will happen in the budget and we will be back at it in the fall and again next spring and again and again. More money is NOT realistic, it is not there, the state does not have it, and the Federal Government will not give it to us. Property taxes reciepts will fall (the notices of change in value have already been mailed). In short, we need a real plan and I don't see the board or the administration really engaging the public like Plymouth-Canton did. I don't see real discussion of consolidation of schools or services, and if these discussions are underway, I applaud those who are willing to undertake them. There are hard choices ahead, ignoring that only will make it even harder in the future.

Steve Norton, MIPFS

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:58 a.m.

I have to agree with Jack: lots of calls for "big change," but precious little detail about what that means. Lots of calls for consolidation, but based on no actual evidence that it would improve our schools. (You can always make things cheaper, but making them cheaper and still as good is the challenge.) There are many initiatives, current and planned, to consolidate things like purchasing and other services at the WISD level; you can find lists on their web site. Those who say they have not seen evidence of this are simply refusing to look. People compare AAPS's funding with other districts, but also slip into their argument that the districts provide the same educational opportunities. Prove it! I do believe that all children deserve the best education possible, but we won't get that by reducing everyone down to the lowest common denominator. Why should my kids be limited because the residents of other communities decided they didn't want to invest as much in education as I would like to? I would, however, be willing to share - to bring other districts up to the level I desire for my own children, much as the county millage would have done. Nearly every commentator celebrating the cuts to schools is implicitly arguing that AAPS doesn't do more, but simply spends more. Once again, prove it! Just about every financial document AAPS has is now either online or has been FOIA'ed by various citizens groups. They keep calling for more transparency, just because they haven't found the "fat" they were sure they would find. They can't imagine that perhaps they were wrong, so they continue to accuse AAPS of hiding information. The games and the fantasies must stop. If you really believe that schools should be cut, that we don't need to invest in education, fine. It's a free country. But I have no interest in debating with people who want to turn back the clock. However, if you do care about schools, about what education will mean for our kids, we can't afford to stay caught in the fantasies that you can get something for nothing, that there are magical "efficiencies" that will relieve us of the responsibility of paying for the schools we want. Our state has hit hard times, but even so, our commitment to education has declined. Overall spending on K-12 schools as a percent of total personal income in Michigan has declined, in both good times and bad. This is a result of tax policy choices we all made back in the 1990s, when we happily gave ourselves tax cuts just when the economy was in the best shape in years. Not only did we not save for a rainy day, we threw away the umbrella!

Jack Panitch

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:39 a.m.

P.S. My credentials have recently been removed from the AAPS web-site. (I am a twice unsuccessful applicant to fill open spots on the BOE. I'm not a doctor. I don't play one on T.V. I am an attorney admitted to practice in MI, PA, D.C. and N.Y. with a strong background in financial analysis and controversy representation. I am also a concerned parent. I borrowed the analogy from medicine for its obvious surgical implications.

Jack Panitch

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 10:13 a.m.

ADTB: I respectfully disagree. Ain't no one in the room going under a knife without knowing their doctor's credentials. Ain't no one touching my kids' schools without me knowing their credentials. Thirsites though I may be, the idea is only as dumb as it sounds to Achilles. So you're saying you are smart enough to make the decisions, and I'm saying in Dr. Todd Roberts and Robert Allen I trust. Not blind trust. Earned trust.

Anonymous Due to Bigotry

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 9:20 a.m.

Jack: Sounds like you're guilty of the logical fallacy known as "appeal to authority". That seems rather elitist. What exactly are your credentials? Being a doctor really doesn't count for much here. In fact, I find that many people with advanced academic credentials tend to not quite realize: "The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool." (Shakespeare) Sounds like by your own argument you're not qualified to comment. I do agree that accountability (with effective metrics that can't be "gamed" easily) is key, and that's a basic judgment and critical thinking determination, not one of credentials. Anyone with a basic understanding of civics and no credentials should be able to figure that out.

Jack Panitch

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 8:43 a.m.

Frankly, DonBee, you need to consider an important alternative view: all the physicians in the crowd are aware of the term, "primum non nocere." Let's take a quick look at the Wikipedia (questionable source of medical knowledge, but fine for these purposes): [beginning of quoted material] Primum non nocere is a Latin phrase that means "First, do no harm." The phrase is sometimes recorded as primum nil nocere. Nonmaleficence, which derives from the maxim, is one of the principal precepts of medical ethics that all medical students are taught in medical school and is a fundamental principle for emergency medical services around the world. Another way to state it is that "given an existing problem, it may be better to do nothing than to do something that risks causing more harm than good." It reminds the physician and other health care providers that they must consider the possible harm that any intervention might do. It is invoked when debating the use of an intervention that carries an obvious risk of harm but a less certain chance of benefit. Since at least 1860, the phrase has been for physicians a hallowed expression of hope, intention, humility, and recognition that human acts with good intentions may have unwanted consequences. A closely related phrase is "Sometimes the cure is worse than the ill." [end of quoted material] What we have and what we need to preserve is academic excellence -- measured through some kind of combined, weighted, achievement focused formula (maybe) -- and no one should ever lose sight of that. And what you appear to be proposing is the financial equivalent of a "whipple," which would be a life-changing event for a patient that came in for a hernia repair. Think about it, man. Please set forth your credentials for all to view. I want to know my doctor's pedigree before I go "under the knife." Are you versed in "best practices?" Do you have a degree from the best schools? Are you published? Do you have years of training as a schools superintendent? I want some good answers, or I want you to leave the operating room and get AMOC in here. (lol) Today is one for the record books. I actually agree with pretty much everything aataxpayer has to say. Good omen, I think.

Will

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 7:23 a.m.

Consolidation of ALL Washtenaw County district schools as a significant cost-cutting measure is long overdue!

Anonymous Due to Bigotry

Mon, Mar 22, 2010 : 3:01 a.m.

"Ann Arbor UM parents will scream if you add these children to their children." Yea, we can't have the Ann Arbor snobs actually have to send their kids to school with normal average children. We all know Ann Arbor is special.

jns131

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 9:37 p.m.

Consolidating Willow Run and Ypsi is a better choice then adding Ann Arbor to the mix. Ann Arbor UM parents will scream if you add these children to their children. Trust me, I have seen parents usurp teachers for their children. Lincoln and Ann Arbor might be a better match because both hi schools have almost the same curriculum. As for the rest? Milan is way too far to be of use to anyone. I do see Dexter mixing with Chelsea and Manchester. Who knows what WISD is going to do with the mix. But we will see it on March 24 with the final vote April 14. I do know this, a lot of people are going to be pink slipped on June 18.

Basic Bob

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 5:18 p.m.

What I hear some people saying, is that if Ann Arbor would consolidate with neighboring districts, that they could not operate on the existing level of funding, but would require the same per-pupil funding they have for Ann Arbor students. If this is the case, we should have the Whitmore Lake or Ypsilanti administration run Ann Arbor schools since they know how to work to a budget.

independentmind

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 3:49 p.m.

Thank you Gramaz, for pointing out the distinctiveness of the situation YPSD finds itself in. I was at Thursday's meeting and I totally agree, most of the parents responding to the plan seemed to have better ideas than the supposed "experts" presenting it. Overall, I thought the presentation was very simpleminded, manipulative, and unprofessional. If the SB ends up voting for any plan cooked up by the folks who presented that powerpoint, then we are in for a world of hurt in this district. Moreover, I find it very striking that they are dispersing 310 or so kids throughout the district, while promising to maintain Ypsi's "school of choice" enrollment. On Thursday night they actually promised parents with kids at Estabrook and Erikson, that their children could remain in their school of choice, even if they didn't live in the nbeighborhood. So how does that work when the only school with enough room to accommodate the majority of Chapelle kids is Adams, a school that is at half capacity and has the lowest MEAP scores in the district. I'll tell you what will happen. The kids with parents who aren't paying attention will end up at Adams (which they want to make K-6), because they will get a note come Fall that that's where their kids are going. So we'll end up with one k-6 school that is majority minority and low-income. Also, lets say that Chapelle parents DON'T chose Adams, and we have to fit 150 kids in either Estabrook or Erikson, so at that point whose kids are going to get precedence? The kids that we have displaced, or the kids from out of the neighborhood who are currently enrolled? This plan wants to please everyone except the people it should be most concerned about: the low income and minority kids at Chapelle whose lives will be upended next Fall. Nice work, administration. There's a little thing called the Civil Rights Act that guarantees all children equal access to education, and this plan currently does not meet the "smell test" when it comes to equal access. The only fair solution is to go back to a neighborhood school model (for kids that aren't coming from out of district). Folks who live in the Adams neighborhood, who are currently sending their kids to Estabrook and Erikson will just have to send their kids to Adams. Kids from south of Michigan ave, should go to either Estabrook or Erikson (depending on how far east they live). This is the only fair solution, and the only one that doesn't disproportionately impact Chapelle kids (who are some of the most vulnerable in the district).

Andrew Thomas

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 3:04 p.m.

DonBee: YpsiLivin' is absolutely correct. Consolidating Ann Arbor with any other district would have the effect of significantly diminishing the per pupil allocation for Ann Arbor students. It's hard to imagine that any efficiencies due to economies of scale would even come close to covering the loss in state funding.

YpsiLivin

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 12:44 p.m.

DonBee, The more logical consolidations leave AAPS alone - unconsolidated with any other school district. AAPS will resist consolidating with any other school district because that will affect (read: reduce) it's state per-pupil allocation. Instead, consider consolidation of Ypsilanti, Lincoln and Willow Run. Consolidate Saline and Milan. Consolidate Dexter and Whitmore Lake. Consolidate Manchester and Chelsea. That would reduce by half the number of school districts in the county. If you need to get down to three school districts, consolidate Lincoln, Willow Run, Ypsilanti and Milan into one school district. Consolidate Whitmore Lake, Dexter, Saline, Chelsea and Manchester and let AAPS remain unconsolidated. Personally, I would consolidate all 10 school districts into one countywide school district and be done with it.

DonBee

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 12:09 p.m.

@aataxpayer - I respectfully disagree, watching the board members who attended the workshops, I did not see any of them take an active role in discussing the few new ideas that were allowed into discussion. They let the administration handle it. I know two of them personally, and they are very nice and well meaning people, but I don't see them doing the strategic work that needs to be done. In conversation, what I hear is that harmony is very important and that a united front is very important. While I agree with you that it is important, it will not get us out of the mess the whole state is in and it will result in hundreds of "paper cut" budget reductions over the next 3 years, rather than the re-think the county needs on education. I have nothing against the current folks they are great people. But they are not dealing with this at the higher level. Their current opposition is worse because they have a clear short term agenda that will only make the situation much worse. We need a different tact strategically and a board that is willing to stand up for that tact. It will not be popular with many people, but it will avoid the repeated pain. The administration will dig in against some or all of it, much of that for personal reasons, because of that the board is going to have to be willing to take a stand.

gramaz

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 12:03 p.m.

YPSI is different from AAPD. The 6.5 million is FOR one loan that should have been further researched before signing. Everytime there's a probelm, are you going to close 2 full schools? The school board wants a fake, fast fix; instead of long range solution. The town is beautifully mixed in every neighborhood, so there's no reason to bus every kindergardener to 1 building for socialization today; close that rambling building, bring the kids back to schools with their older siblings. Save the fuel $$$, cut back on the bus drivers to keep the teachers! The SB produced a "pro & con" sheet on the schools closings, they seemed to forget they speaking to the business families of YPSI; they had no projected costs or numbers!!! This cover-up votes on Monday. Pick 5 parents from that intelligent crowd, let them give you all their $$ saving ideas, do them; you won't be throwing away 6.5 mil.

DonBee

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 11:47 a.m.

If you look at the way the boundaries of the school districts run in the county. One logical consolidation is: Milan/Lincoln/Saline for one district - Manchester/Chelsea for a second - Ann Arbor/Whitmore Lake/Dexter/Willow Run/Ypsilanti for the third. I can hear the screams now and I know I will get hate mail, but this is the kind of long term thinking that no one seems to be doing. With 3 instead of 10 school boards and 3 instead of 10 sets of administrators and hopefully 1 set of purchasing, accounting and other back office staff headquartered at the WISD, maybe we can keep most of the cuts away from the children. This would also allow the maximization of the use of buildings and really allow for magnet programs in the country. As to the current AAPS school board, I find them too timid, letting the administration set all the policy and budgets, they are effectively a "yes man" - that does not mean they are bad people, but rather they have decided playing nice is more important than really managing the strategy of the school system. As to A2CRSS they have an agenda that is too short term and does not really look to the strategic issues in the county. I for one will vote for neither set of people in the next election. We need people on the board who are willing to make the hard decisions that we need. This is not just in Ann Arbor, but in all the districts in the county.

jns131

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 11:03 a.m.

Buss Drivers and Monitors were presented from the Employer a new contract to be voted on on Tuesday. This involves a zero zero 10% pay cut after the third year. Drivers and Monitors get no increase in pay for two years but yet after 3 years get a pay cut? Is this the alternative to privatization? I believe so. At this point I think the ones who make the most are going to benefit the most. Sad state of affairs the districts are in.

Kathy Griswold

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 9:11 a.m.

AAPS is faced with challenges, but we are in a much better position than the vast majority of districts in the state and the surrounding districts. Our foundation allowance is almost $2,000 more per student than the average for the surrounding schools. The district has repeatedly stressed the need for more revenue and stated that the Michigan foundation allowance has not kept up with inflation. While the foundation allowance has lagged, it is not the whole story. The AAPS voters have been very generous in approving bonds and sinking funds. Some of this additional revenue has allowed operating expenditures to increase at a rate much greater than inflation some would argue at an unsustainable rate. AAPS seems to have developed a campaign mindset with the primary focus on increasing revenue and marketing the districts strengths and indeed AAPS has much to boast about from extraordinary staff and exceptional students to dedicated parents and a generous tax base. However, AAPS has many opportunities for improvement that beg attention. I urge community members to ask, What problem are we trying to solve? and keep the focus on what is in the best interest of all students. Please attend the community forum Framing the Conversation Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities of the AAPS at 7 PM on Tuesday, March 23, at the Mallett Creek Library hosted by the Coalition for Responsible Schools for All Students (A2CRSS). More information at www.A2CRSS.org.

Spyker

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 8:59 a.m.

I agree with all comments by DonBee, other than his last paragraph. The US Constitution stipulates that public education is the responsibility of the individual States, not the Federal Government. To comply with our Constitution, all educational assistance from the Federal Government is tied to accomplishing a specific goal or funding a specialized program - such as "No Child Left Behind", "Head Start", "Title 1", etc. Receipt of General Fund assistance from Washington will require a re-write of the U.S. Constitution. And with our current National Debt, there is no easy money remaining in Washington either. DonBee's endorsement for far reaching and strategic changes in school district funding is the only feasible long lasting solution. This should involve the quantity of Districts, how those Districts are allowed to spend their State stipend, and how we as taxpayers fund those stipends.

DonBee

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 8:40 a.m.

@sh1 - I don't want to see anyone hurt by what is happening. But, I also don't know where there is more money. I think what Plymouth-Canton did by having the community really dig in and find savings was a very good thing. Some of those committees met weekly for months. AAPS overspent their energy budget by more than 50% in a year when energy prices were down. I know the new control system at Skyline is not being used as it should be. With all school districts facing the same kinds of problems, I would expect some creative solutions, like consolidation of purchasing and technical support for the districts under the ISD. But I don't see any moves in those directions. Consolidation of districts is another move that should really be considered. Having one set of administrators over 2 or 3 of the existing districts would allow more money to be funneled to teaching. In AAPS more than 50% more is being spent on administration than in Plymouth-Canton and P-C has more students, but I don't see anyone talking about administrators and support staff. While the teachers in AAPS have to pay for the top level benefits now, they still get money back if they pick the bottom level benefits program. Instead of a pay cut, offer the bottom level program as the one that the district fully covers and then let them pay the difference for any program above that. I know for those people who opt for the better programs it is effectively a pay cut, but it still offers a very good program fully paid for. The state is broke and will remain broke. The property taxes will fall by between 8 and 10 percent next year impacting the bond fund and the sinking fund. Even though a number of folks say those funds don't count, they do and the operating budget will have to cover the shortfall in the bond fund, if any. The WISD special education money will also fall next year and that will impact not just the WISD, but each and every school district. That is the one part of the budget that is still so opaque to me, that I have no clue what a 10 percent cut will mean. That millage comes up for vote in a year or so too. With the mood of the overall voters, I would not count on it being renewed. The problem is that even if the economy comes roaring back the limits on property value increases will mean that it will take at least 4 years for these taxes to come back on the existing homes, unless they are sold. This is a multi-year problem. As a community and a county we are not looking at structural changes to how we run education, we are just making tactical decisions. We will be right back here in the fall and again next spring. This fall's election will change the major players in Lansing and education is on many candidates minds, but where does the money come from in a state that has fallen from the top twenty in income to the bottom 20 in income and continues to slide down the rankings? I know education is important, but so are a number of other things, like feeding people without jobs. Finding money in Lansing for education will be difficult. The one place we are short changed is at the Federal level, and we have the Chair of the committee that can help with that now, the question is - will he? If I were looking for money I would be on the phone, on the email and writing letters to Rep Levin.

sh1

Sun, Mar 21, 2010 : 7:57 a.m.

A teacher pay cut and a swift kick to the gut oughta placate a lot of people out there.