Corbett Community Forum
July 16, 2024, 05:50:40 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Proposal to add more students to CSD  (Read 5859 times)
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 974

« on: June 09, 2020, 02:21:44 PM »


Special Board meeting Wednesday June 10th: 7PM - Details here:

Board meeting Wednesday, June 17th: 7PM - Public Budget Hearing & CSD Board meeting. Details here:

* Select here for an audio clip and more details surrounding the interim superintendent position here:

Board meeting Tuesday, June 23rd: Select here for information:


A new group called "Together for Corbett" has been formed suporting the CSD budget committee and Randy Trani's visions for the district. They are encouraging signatures on a petition to the school board to support the proposed budget and adding 85 more out of district students to generate funding. They are, as I understand it, collecting any signatures (including "dozens and dozens" of CSD staff and parents/relatives of students that do not all live in Corbett). The organizers of this group consist (at least in part) of a current budget committee member and a past CSD employee. Both are very much in support of the status quo.

* Since Corbett is now an all Charter district, I am sure some will say it shouldn't matter where the signatures come from. However, when it comes to petitions trying to influence a school board's decisions (that could impact our local taxes or the size of our community school) it does matter to many of us and it should be made clear to the school board. Especially after all the work that went into the Saxton report which laid out a very clear plan of reducing the number of students which would actually allow us to eventually recapture our small school funding.

If you live here and support the new board members who are trying to limit out of area student growth, please sign this petition:
In response to the above efforts, this petition was created for residents to show support for the school board majority who is trying to stay the course per the Saxton Report and to return the school district to a community school with a majority of local students vs. almost half from outside of Corbett.

* The above information was added by myself, Mindy Schmidt. For the record: I did not create the above petition. I am not a part of the below IC3S group. I did sign this petition. I also sent a letter to the school board (see  below in this thread) and I support the work of the IC3S group with Rob Saxton and encourage the school board to stay the course and stick with the commitments made to follow those recommendations, which can be found here:


    -------Original Message-------
From: Corbett IC3S <>
Subject: Call for Q & Q for Interim Superintendent input & Tues, 6/23 Board Mtg.
Sent: 20 Jun '20 9:20am

Good morning Everyone,

Hope this finds you and your family well this morning.
Congratulations,  Class of 2020, all your families, and all the school staff who finished out a hard year together!
For those who are celebrating graduation tonight - wishing you a joyous and safe celebration!

A few updates to pass on for this upcoming week:

1. Superintendent post input: Please email your comments/additions/deletions to the Board this weekend so the Board has time to review them before Tuesday.  
Find the current sheet from the 6/17 board packet :

Email your comments to: Deputy Clerk, Robin Lindeen-Blakeley ( &  Board Chair Todd Mickalson ( , cc Board Members.  (See emails below)

2. Special Board Meeting: Tuesday, June 23rd - 7pm on a zoom platform
As many of you likely heard last Wednesday, there were agenda items that were tabled and will be action items this Tuesday. Check out the agenda link.
Including: Superintendent resignation, Interim Selection Process & Budget Adoption.

Please note the 7 public comment slots have been filled. Public comments can be emailed to Deputy Clerk, Robin Lindeen-Blackeley and Cc Board Members.  
Board Members
Board Chairman: Todd Mickalson /
Board Member: Bob Buttke /
Board Member: David Gorman /
Board Member: Katey Kinnear /
Board Member: Todd Redfern /
Board Member: Michelle Vo /
Board Member: Cless Woodward /
Superintendent: Randy Trani /
Deputy Clerk: Robin Lindeen-Blakeley /

A few questions I offer for us all to consider:
How can we create compromise solutions while upholding our core values and respecting our differences?

How can we have civil discourse, honest dialogue and make clear requests, while also demonstrating respect, kindness and civility with our entire community?

How will we demonstrate to our children how to make it through challenging times by problem solving together even when we don't all agree on everything?  

Sincere regards,
Mikaila on behalf of IC3S

From: Corbett IC3S <>
Date: June 9, 2020 at 11:23:51 AM PDT
Subject: Comments & Considerations from IC3S

Hello Everyone,

We hope this email finds you and your loved ones healthy and safe.

We recognize there is ongoing public discussion about the economic challenges that the COVID 19 pandemic has imposed on state school funding, and how this will impact the Corbett School District.

We recognize there’s been a lot of public discussion about how to prioritize students, teachers and academic programming while minimizing the impacts of the budget shortfall this year and for years to come. Community members, students, teachers, budget committee members and board members have voiced their strong desire to prioritize students, teachers, maintain the current level of service and sustain a fiscally responsible ending fund balance for the School District.

We also remember that the School Board and District have made a commitment to following priorities:

·    Begin a slow process of drawing down enrollment size to the agreed 1050 students, thus exercising their control of numbers as a public charter school.

·    Implementation of the Visions and Values set forth by the District and community process.  

·    Initiate a participatory strategic planning process.

·    Address the needs identified in the Student Success Act input process.  

·    To take steps to improve the school facilities - namely for the main campus middle school.  

The Board's work and commitments were in motion prior to the COVID 19 pandemic. This work was not made any easier this year. Now they are having to adapt their planning and evaluate how to uphold their commitments, maintain fiscal responsibility, appoint new leadership for the District and support the entire community through these challenging times.

Since the second Budget Committee meeting on June 3rd, public discussions have increased and intensified about how people would like the School Board to address the budget shortfall and planning for the anticipated future cuts to the state school funding. These are understandably concerning, frustrating, nerve-wracking and passionate conversations.

Tomorrow evening the School Board will hold a Special Board meeting to further discuss the proposed budget from the Budget Committee.  The seven School Board members will discuss and work towards a budget plan they will vote to adopt on June 17th at the Public Budget Hearing.

Special Board Meeting: Wednesday, June 10th, at 7pm on a Zoom online platform

Public comments can be emailed to school board members prior to the meeting. Board members have made it clear they are listening, calling back community members who leave phone numbers in their emails and taking into consideration all the input they are receiving. You can find school board members’ email addresses here:

Find information to attend the zoom meeting tomorrow night (Wednesday, June 10th)  from 7 - 8pm here:

After tomorrow, the next board meeting will be on Wednesday, June 17th: Public Budget Hearing & CSD Board meeting.



IC3S feels there are some inaccuracies being discussed since the June 3rd Budget Committee meeting.

Below are some clarifications & information to consider:  


·       During the Budget Committee meeting on June 3rd, Dr. Trani and the District Business Manager, Doana Anderson, presented detailed information on the Oregon state school funding projections and the budget review for Corbett School District. Part of what they explained is:


- "To keep the original proposed Ending Fund Balance (EFB) of $1.4 million at the end of the year, we need to reduce expenditures or increase revenues by $658,943" (this budget shortfall does not include the anticipated loss in Measure 98 funds (anticipated to receive 38% of allocated funds) or loss of anticipated Student Investment Act funds (anticipated to receive 40% of allocated funds) ) (See attached picture for details)

- Dr. Trani presented three potential scenarios of how to reduce expenditures and/or increase revenues by roughly $660,000. The scenarios presented included the options of adding students and cutting FTE. Three possible scenarios were presented: 1) Adding 85 students, and cutting no teachers; 2) Bring in 0 Students, and cut 6 teachers ; 3) Bring in 65 students and cut 1.5 FTE (teach positions). (See attached picture for specific numbers).

·       Budget Committee members and Board Members discussed these 3 scenarios; however additional scenarios were not raised.

·      On June 3rd, after committee discussion, Budget Committee Chair Hope Beraka made the proposal to add $660,000 in revenue (provided by increasing enrollment by 85 students) to the proposed budget to cover the budget shortfall for the General Fund and maintain the Ending Fund Balance of $1.4 million.

9 votes were in favor of a proposed amendment to cover the deficit by adding $660,000 in revenue. These 9 favored adding 85 students from out of district to bring in that revenue. (6 Budget Committee members, 3 Board members)

5 votes opposed adding $660,000 in revenue to the budget. They opposed this proposed budgeting strategy, while continuing to maintain the current level of service. (1 Budget Committee member, 4 Board members)

·       Budget committees are advisory - they make recommendations to the School Board for consideration. In many cases, budgets are revised after the School Board receives them from a budget committee. This is common in other school districts. It is the responsibility of the Board to vote and account for final approval of the District budget.

·       We are watching/participating in a democratic process. Our community has a constituency of voting members who elect Board Members, which then appoint Budget Committee members who ultimately, advise them and make a recommendation.  

·       This is a part of a bigger process. The budgeting process is necessarily reflective of the trajectory of the school district operations, and a numerical reflection of the dialogue between the school district leadership and voting constituents of the school district and entire school community.  

·       Based on Corbett School District Policy DBEA - Budget Committee: “By law, the budget committee is charged with making recommendations concerning financial priorities.”  We have heard the Board Members and Budget Committee members in recent public sessions articulate their financial priorities for the CSD which include retaining teachers, maintaining healthy class size, supporting academic excellence, sustaining a fiscally responsible ending fund balance and positioning the District to improve facilities in the short and long term. The Board has regularly identified these priorities in public sessions and are obligated to create, optimize and maintain a balanced budget. (

·       Based on the Oregon School Board Association (OSBA) explanation of "What does the budget committee NOT do?"

The budget committee does not set salaries, benefits, or contract terms for employees or administrators. The budget committee does not set staffing levels. The budget committee does not decide whether or not a service or program should be provided. The budget committee does not make district policies.

For further information:

 For consideration:  

·       There are combinations of reducing spending and increasing revenue which will allow the District to retain teachers and maintain programs at the current service level, without spending down the ending fund balance (EFB) below the 5% recommended EFB.  

·       The service the District will provide will be the same. The difference is where the money is coming from.  

·       Prior to the COVID pandemic, the Corbett School District, School Board, voting community constituents and entire school community have been engaged in democratic processes and civil dialogue to chart a way forward which is reflective of shared Visions and Values, Public Board Discussions and future strategic planning. These processes still hold true now as the School Board and District face unforeseen challenges and impacts from a global pandemic.

For more information, write to the Board Members with questions and tune into the upcoming meetings tomorrow & June 17th.

IC3S supports and encourages Board Members to rely on all the facts and processes that have led them to their place of understanding as how to best move Corbett District forward with broad community support both in the near and long term.

Best regards,

Mikaila, Jeff & Brad with IC3S

* image-1.png (96.02 KB, 808x455 - viewed 1025 times.)

* image.png (147.69 KB, 813x412 - viewed 964 times.)
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 974

« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2020, 06:55:57 PM »

June 9, 2020

To the Corbett School Board,

Eric and I understand that there has been a lot of discussion around school funding in relation to how to move forward in light of the effects of the COVID 19 recession. We also understand that yet another “community” group has formed that is comprised of some in district members, but mostly out of district members. This group advocates bringing in more students as the solution to our funding gap. This group also appears to consist of people that, even before COVID 19, were very much opposed to the plan for our school district to stay small.  

Eric and I are writing to let the board know that we are opposed to bringing in large numbers of students and are in complete support of the previous plan laid out by Rob Saxton last spring. The purpose of having any plan is to guide the decision making process through ups and downs in the future. The plan that Rob Saxton helped us develop lays the groundwork for community trust and provides a framework for moving forward. We support and recommend staying the course and keeping with this plan as best as our school district can.

  While we have a good plan and roadmap, it is understandable that we need to make adjustments for the decreased funding due to COVID 19, however we are opposed to knee-jerk reactions. School district funding is a fluid and ever-changing subject and we have no idea of knowing what the state has planned in the future for funding and also in regards to social distancing when schools re-open. Rather than operate from a crisis mode, how about we take a deep breath and navigate this issue step by step as we see how the other components play out?

Some points that are particularly important to Eric and I -

- During this economic time when so many people have lost their jobs or have been furloughed, it is unreasonable and arrogant to expect that there will be no staff cuts at our school district.

- We are not opposed to bringing in siblings to help defray costs, but we are adamantly opposed to bringing in 85 new students. We do not want to be committed to that many students for that length of time.

- The most valuable result of the Rob Saxton process, from our perspective, was and continues to be agreement and consensus on a level not seen for decades in the Corbett community.
Abandoning the plans made with this process will effectively destroy the trust, agreement and consensus that has been so hard won in our community.

- Over 250 hours of work by Rob Saxton (he was contracted for 50), and hundreds more hours from the other people involved in this process, particularly the time from IC3S members, far outweigh any petition that is largely made up of out of district parents.

- We value the out of district students. If our school provides programming that is attractive to out of district parents and fits the needs of their kids, we welcome them here. However, we resent being told how to make decisions in our school district by out of district parents. This is our school district, we vote in this district and we will make the decisions involved with it.

- If the school board decides to add 85 more students and abandon the plan formed in the past year and a half, they will lose the ability to pass a bond. Isn’t that the most pressing issue of our school district and community right now? Passing a bond to pay for facilities improvements puts our students and teachers first. Our inability to pass a bond is what spurred the Rob Saxton report to begin with. The ENTIRE purpose of that report and process was to help our community pass a bond. The result of that process was an agreement of more and more diverse community members on how to move forward than I have ever seen before.

If the board decides to bring in 85 more students and the community votes down another bond, how will the district responsibly care for these students? What sort of facilities will we have for them?

In closing, we know that events are changing what we thought our future would look like. We support     the board in doing their best to stick to the roadmap that took so long and took so many people so much time and effort to develop. We look forward to passing a bond and moving forward.


April and Eric Eaton
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 974

« Reply #2 on: June 15, 2020, 11:19:24 AM »

From: Brad Garrett <>
Date: June 14, 2020 at 6:31:29 PM PDT
Subject: IC3S Final Thoughts ..

Board Members –

First and foremost, we appreciate your public service and commitment to finding common ground as you make decisions that will have a direct impact on how Corbett Schools will function moving forward.

There has been a lot of conversation over the last ten days related to the budget and that is not a bad thing.  The more citizens involved in a discussion about school funding issues only increases the odds of a more informed electorate. An informed electorate is an essential component of democracy.

Your options have not changed in the last ten days – you can add students, you can make cuts, or you use a combination of these methods to offset next year’s deficit. It is our hope that any debate related to which method to use includes a discussion related to sustainability for the near term and years to come.

Adding students is the easy option.  It solves the immediate deficit problem and retains the current level of service.   This option does not take a whole lot of imagination – we have been doing this for the last twenty years and we continue to come up short in our budget regardless of state school funding cuts. We have been dependent on welcoming more students into the District to pay for the current level of service. No doubt there are amazing, educated students graduating from Corbett High School at high rates. No doubt the entire District staff have been and continue to work extremely hard to care for and educate the student body with limited resources. Leadership within the District has explained that many teachers and staff feel maxed out at their current level of operations. Bottom line is we have not solved the repeated budget shortfalls by continuing to increase enrollment in our schools.

Making budget cuts is hard.   Having fixed costs as most of your budget is going to require cuts to FTE if you choose this option.   This option allows the Board to remain committed to reducing K-12 population, but we can anticipate that a restructuring of the current level of service will occur and class sizes will increase.  There is $660,000 in the budget to cut but it will not come without some shared pain across the various budget categories.

Add some and cut some:  Finding a middle ground can solve the problem – combining cuts to fixed cost with revenue generated from adding students gives you any number of options.   It is a simple inverse relationship – to decrease cuts to fix costs you add more students and vice versa.

Other considerations:

·        Resist the practice of basing any budgeting decision on money we may get.   Bond, Levy, Rainy Day Fund, or Governor Brown have been mentioned at various times as revenue sources and currently they cumulatively stand at $0.  Deal with the money we have – or don’t have in this case.

·        Your decision will most likely impact any future ask from the voters.  Bond or levy -  it will not matter to those individuals who support reducing the size of the district.  Increasing the size of the district after making the commitment to reduce it will have consequences at the ballot box.  It is important that you factor that into your final decision.

·        While you will approve a budget for this coming school year your decision will have a direct impact on future years.  1,300 students is the maximum number of slots available within the Corbett School District – adding 85 students will take us up to that point.  Revenue is maximized at this point – where is your revenue source now?

·        All Districts across the state, across the country, are facing cuts to funding. Yes, other schools may be starting with more in their coffers than Corbett. However, at what point does the Board stop to consider the impact on neighboring districts of Corbett School District increasing the number of charter slots available in your lottery? In a time when we are all called upon to examine, dig into and change systemic inequalities and disparities in our systems, it seems this is a moment to understand the impact of our actions on our neighboring districts.

·        The current situation may provide a silver lining that was unexpected.  We can anticipate the school is going to look a lot different as we move into the Fall with combinations of in-person, online, and hybrid students.  Any chance we can modify what and how we do things to save a buck? – knowing that might have to happen starting next year anyway?

·        Facilities safety and maintenance have been clearly identified by the board and District as high priority. Adding students to facilities that are already in need of replacement only adds Increased risk. Any students that are brought in below MS level are at risk of needing to be housed in the current middle school facility until funds have been secured to improve the Natural resource property purchased earlier this year to house the middle school until a new building can be built on campus. 


We do believe that everyone involved in this discussion wants to do the right things for teachers and students of the Corbett School District.  It has also become obvious that what that means depends on which side of the argument you are on in this case. 

Unfortunately, circumstances have essentially turned our students into “revenue pawns”.   In these discussions they've been reduced to a $7,773 check that walks through the door. Of course, these students and their families are tremendous assets to the District far beyond the dollar amount of state school funding which comes with each student. Yet, we must be honest with ourselves that at the core of the budget conversation, students have been reduced to "budget pawns". This is somewhat a function of the state school funding formula. However, we all look forward to the day when conversations about adding students evolve because we are interested in adding something to our program instead of adding kids to prevent us from cutting something.   This is called being “right side up” the opposite of where we are at this point.

Respectively Submitted.

Mikaila, Jeff, and Brad

Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 974

« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2020, 11:38:21 AM »

    -------Original Message-------
From: Mindy Schmidt <>
To: <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, <>, <>
Cc: <>
Sent: 21 Jun '20 11:31am

Dear Corbett School Board of Directors,

When many of us cast our ballots for new board members during the last election, we did so because we hoped to change
the status quo. We felt hopeful that Rob Saxton's work, on behalf of our school district, would return some civility to the
discussions and return our schools to the community. However, it appears the status quo is not going down without a

What is the "status quo"? I think it looks like this:

> Adding kids from out of the area to fill budget holes and/or allow for expansion.
> Replacing local kids with out of area kids - without exit interviews.
> Bypassing the County and required public hearings with the original charter creation.
> Running out of space because of adding too many students.
> Hiring practices that benefit supporters (and friends/family) of current staff or leadership.
> Forcing bond amounts that will triple (or more) campus instructional space and then failing to gain the votes to pass
> Taking out loans (since the community won’t pass a bond) to add more classroom spaces, buildings, real estate and
ultimately debt.
> Blaming a “small vocal group” in the community for opposing these choices and issues created by CSD leadership.
> Creating groups (“Corbett Community Advocates”, “Unity in Corbett”, “Together for Corbett” etc.) to protect the status
quo/CSD leadership.
> Marginalizing and spreading rumors about those that stand in opposition to the status quo and ultimately causing

"Together for Corbett?"

If the school board is going to use the number of signatures on petitions and comments from a newly formed group,
“Together for Corbett”, as justification to sway other board members into agreeing to additional out of area students next
year, then please consider this:

1. The whole of the community does not even know about these petitions, so it is far from democratic.
2. There are "dozens and dozens" of CSD employees who signed this petition.
3. This new group is comprised of and organized by the status quo.
4. If the school board was truly interested in what voters wanted, then you would allow the new board members (who
were elected to fulfill their duties for their constituents based on the platform they ran on) to cast their votes as they feel
is best and without harassment.

The Board Meeting of June 17, 2020 was described by more than one person as a "train wreck". I can not disagree after
listening to the audio. The most obvious examples of bad behavior at that meeting came from the CEA (CSD's teacher's
union) president (this person is also a past school board chair and a past budget committee member so should know
better) as well as a current CSD budget committee member and key organizer for the "Together for Corbett" petition.
Here is a link with audio of that section to illustrate this point.

Board members (and our chair) should be able to do their work without having to navigate organized "stacked deck"
comment periods, formal complaints, weaponized social media posts from years prior, interruptions, disrespect/bullying,
and shaming because their opinion goes against the grain of the status quo or current leadership/staff.

Whatever the final decision is about adding more students next year, or what you personally feel is the best way forward,
I would really hope we could all agree that there is a clear need to learn to behave better than this when our opinions
differ. Many people are watching (listening) and this behavior only deepens the existing divisions when it comes to CSD.

Thank you for your time,

Mindy Schmidt
P.O. Box 5
Corbett OR 97019

The below was not part of this letter. This is to explain the above audio link.
That clip was from this discussion at the meeting on June 17th:

There are two sections of the school board meeting this last Wednesday that I really think people (who were not watching) should hear. I think it could be titled "How not to behave as an employee or budget committee member of CSD at a board meeting" or just simply "How not to behave?".

This first section (Thanks to Karina for providing the transcription and audio.) Includes public comment about the list of qualities and qualifications the district would be looking for in an interim superintendent.

Before you listen to this audio clip (if you do) remember two things:

1. The reason the meeting went so late (and this section was almost at midnight) was in large part due to the additional time, comments and discussion that took place with the budget committee and because of the "Together for Corbett" group.

Some of our newer school board members want to hold the line and work at compromising on the numbers of out of area kids so we can try and follow the recommendations of Rob Saxton. This is not what all the CSD staff, current superintendent or his followers "Together for Corbett" want.

2. The information that Hope and Sis felt was being sprung on them, was in the board packet days prior to the meeting. In addition it would ONLY be for the interim Superintendent advertisement.

As Sarah (from the OSBA) stated, in a permanent search it is very different and there’s multiple opportunities for input and feedback from the community.

Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 974

« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2020, 05:46:41 PM »

From: Tessie Adams <>
Date: June 22, 2020 at 4:36:31 PM PDT
To: "" <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Subject: Thoughts for tomorrow night
Reply-To: "" <>

Dear board members,
I will try to be Brief as I realize your time is valuable. I have several topics I feel I need to touch on a  regarding the school. 
First, I want Todd to know that only the extreme few who have chosen to further their misguided agenda by trying to assign a decade old incident to you is a cheap shot and that many many community members recognize it for what it is, a desperate attempt to jump on a political bandwagon twisting it to fit their own needs.
I also want to commend Todd for staying calm and professional as Hope badgered you and showed her true colors. 

A Bond
I was heartened when the Saxton report came out and we had a clear direction to reduce student population and try to undo some of the damage that Randi has caused during his tenure.  Alienating the community and going against their wishes being one of the biggest.  I believe that out of district parents should never have any say in our school size.  This is our community, they are visitors for only a time, we the community will be paying for any bond to build a new school for years after they are gone not them.  If we hold true to the plan continuing to reduce size and increase learning options a bond will pass.

The new Sup
I would respectfully ask that Hopes attempt to turn a job search for a new superintendent into a black political agenda be refused.  This is not the time, place or forum for her politics to be forced permanently onto our school district. 
I would like to see a clean break from the Randy dynasty considering most of the leadership is moving on as well.  Hire an outside interm and permanent superintendent.  One who is fully aware of the communities wishes to stay small.

Bringing 85 new students into the district. 
I am saddened to hear that this is even being considered.  The Saxton plan is a manageable and sustainable plan to lower our student population.  We cannot even provide adequate educational space for the students we currently have.  Students are going to be forced to be online again to maintain the distancing requirements.  Unless these students will be required to be online ONLY students then I feel it is irresponsible and against the wishes of the community to allow them in.  The 10 siblings is where it should stop.   This will cause attrition of teachers and students overtime but sometime you have to trim the old branches away to allow the plant to flourish.

The budget
Is there not a surplus we can use right now since the money from the state is delayed due to COVID?  Also,  wouldn't there be a carryover surplus from this year as there was no transportation costs or wages, no food/nutrition costs (except for free or reduced lunch families), no water or electrical costs, etc due to all he campuses being closed for the last 11weeks? 
I have heard that one of the cuts on the table is the SRO position.  Deputy Kaiser had made amazing in roads with students even though he has only been there one year.  Cuttings this vital position that supports our school staff and students in so many more ways that just enforcing laws and keeping us safe is I believe short-sighted and again politically motivated.  Our 2 neighboring districts east and west namely Gresham and Good River have made it clear that they will not be cutting any SRO positions.  I hope that as board members you can weigh the value of an SRO against the small savings in the budget.

Changing of the guard
I am really hopeful for change with the changing of the leadership.  Namely NO more AP for all.  This would also save a large budget line item if the school did not pay for all those wasted exams.
 Sadly my children have to enter the failed experiment of the 8-9 academy this fall.  The school was able to spring this idea not only on the community but the board as well with no warning or input.  Since it's stated purpose seems to be to get an AP pass rate up for 9th graders can we PLEASE get rid of this waste of education.  From the many parents I have talked to the academy is a complete disappointment failing the students and their education.  The teachers were able to put this academy together seemingly overnight I'm sure they can go back to the model that worked even quicker.  This would relieve overcrowding in the high school somewhat as well.  There are several months to put things back to what worked before.
I apologise for the long email but there are so many issues right now that will have far reaching consequences for good or for ill.
Thank you for your time and service to our community and our schools.  I hope we can all come together and use this opportunity to make lasting positive changes to our district.
Tessie Adams

Pages: [1]
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.14 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!