APS budget is unacceptable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:50% of 0 is 0.

The % doesn’t matter, funding the cost matters.

If you are concerned about the %, raise taxes to maintain 50%.

The percentage absolutely does matter. Especially to the 19% of the county population that does not have school age children - which is not me - I have 2 and another 2 no longer in APS. But the county has competing costs, some just as important as schools, and the answer cannot always be raise taxes to fund all the costs that each group of various constituents think are necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% of 0 is 0.

The % doesn’t matter, funding the cost matters.

If you are concerned about the %, raise taxes to maintain 50%.

The percentage absolutely does matter. Especially to the 19% of the county population that does not have school age children - which is not me - I have 2 and another 2 no longer in APS. But the county has competing costs, some just as important as schools, and the answer cannot always be raise taxes to fund all the costs that each group of various constituents think are necessary.

If you're a 23-year-old renting a Rosslyn condo, and you'll move back to Iowa in a couple years, then it's rational to not care about the schools. Every homeowner in Arlington is invested in the health of APS, whether or not they have school-age children.

It blows my mind how many of my neighbors have told me they don't care about school funding. They're failing to see that our home prices go up the way they do because of the premium people pay for a great school district (yes, of course location is also a factor). But improving the schools benefits everyone who's invested in some way in the community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% of 0 is 0.

The % doesn’t matter, funding the cost matters.

If you are concerned about the %, raise taxes to maintain 50%.

The percentage absolutely does matter. Especially to the 19% of the county population that does not have school age children - which is not me - I have 2 and another 2 no longer in APS. But the county has competing costs, some just as important as schools, and the answer cannot always be raise taxes to fund all the costs that each group of various constituents think are necessary.

If you're a 23-year-old renting a Rosslyn condo, and you'll move back to Iowa in a couple years, then it's rational to not care about the schools. Every homeowner in Arlington is invested in the health of APS, whether or not they have school-age children.

It blows my mind how many of my neighbors have told me they don't care about school funding. They're failing to see that our home prices go up the way they do because of the premium people pay for a great school district (yes, of course location is also a factor). But improving the schools benefits everyone who's invested in some way in the community.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% of 0 is 0.

The % doesn’t matter, funding the cost matters.

If you are concerned about the %, raise taxes to maintain 50%.

The percentage absolutely does matter. Especially to the 19% of the county population that does not have school age children - which is not me - I have 2 and another 2 no longer in APS. But the county has competing costs, some just as important as schools, and the answer cannot always be raise taxes to fund all the costs that each group of various constituents think are necessary.

If you're a 23-year-old renting a Rosslyn condo, and you'll move back to Iowa in a couple years, then it's rational to not care about the schools. Every homeowner in Arlington is invested in the health of APS, whether or not they have school-age children.

It blows my mind how many of my neighbors have told me they don't care about school funding. They're failing to see that our home prices go up the way they do because of the premium people pay for a great school district (yes, of course location is also a factor). But improving the schools benefits everyone who's invested in some way in the community.

+1

+2

The county board seemed to fail to grasp this entirely when schools stayed close for so long during COVID, and they haven't done an amazing bounce back (see: failed virtual program, etc).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% of 0 is 0.

The % doesn’t matter, funding the cost matters.

If you are concerned about the %, raise taxes to maintain 50%.

The percentage absolutely does matter. Especially to the 19% of the county population that does not have school age children - which is not me - I have 2 and another 2 no longer in APS. But the county has competing costs, some just as important as schools, and the answer cannot always be raise taxes to fund all the costs that each group of various constituents think are necessary.

If you're a 23-year-old renting a Rosslyn condo, and you'll move back to Iowa in a couple years, then it's rational to not care about the schools. Every homeowner in Arlington is invested in the health of APS, whether or not they have school-age children.

It blows my mind how many of my neighbors have told me they don't care about school funding. They're failing to see that our home prices go up the way they do because of the premium people pay for a great school district (yes, of course location is also a factor). But improving the schools benefits everyone who's invested in some way in the community.

Unfortunately, I don't think APS has been known as a great school district for several years. When my family moved to Arlington 20 years ago, APS was known for limiting the number of students in each classroom and paying teachers some of the best salaries around. That is what made APS a great school district. Those days are long gone. I also think APS continues to see the success that they do, in large part, because of highly educated and involved parents - like the ones on this thread.

All but one of my kids are out of APS now and one, in fact, just started teaching HS in Fairfax this past fall. I care about school funding but I think the SB and the past couple superintendents have been irresponsible with how some of the money has been spent and I have no desire to give them a blank check as some on this thread seem to think appropriate. I would love a return to the days when APS was known for great teacher pay and small class sizes but I don't see that happening under this superintendent.

As far as my home value, I'm not so sure people are paying a premium to live in my neighborhood because of APS. In the past several years, more than half the families who recently bought a house on the couple surrounding blocks are sending their children to private and Catholic school. I think most are paying a premium for a short commute to DC, public transportation nearby, easy access to 66, and handful of businesses, shops and restaurants they can walk to. Would they more to my neighborhood if the school district was horrible - probably not. But they are willing to tolerate decent because the send their kids elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% of 0 is 0.

The % doesn’t matter, funding the cost matters.

If you are concerned about the %, raise taxes to maintain 50%.

The percentage absolutely does matter. Especially to the 19% of the county population that does not have school age children - which is not me - I have 2 and another 2 no longer in APS. But the county has competing costs, some just as important as schools, and the answer cannot always be raise taxes to fund all the costs that each group of various constituents think are necessary.

If you're a 23-year-old renting a Rosslyn condo, and you'll move back to Iowa in a couple years, then it's rational to not care about the schools. Every homeowner in Arlington is invested in the health of APS, whether or not they have school-age children.

It blows my mind how many of my neighbors have told me they don't care about school funding. They're failing to see that our home prices go up the way they do because of the premium people pay for a great school district (yes, of course location is also a factor). But improving the schools benefits everyone who's invested in some way in the community.

+1

+2

The county board seemed to fail to grasp this entirely when schools stayed close for so long during COVID, and they haven't done an amazing bounce back (see: failed virtual program, etc).

that has nothing to do with it, move on

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And FCPS still funds TJ and offers more advanced instruction at elementary and middle school level. Amazing. You know how they do it? Larger class sizes! APS can’t have it all.

I’m good with the current gifted/advanced offerings for ES and MS. I definitely prioritize having smaller class sizes over adding more advanced options.

- Parent of two gifted kids

Higher class sizes are the way to pay teachers more in APS. That’s why FCPS can pay more.

Or push Youngkin and the CB to properly fund our (underfunded) schools.

Why was Youngkin trying to cut K-12 education? The GA salvaged some of the money but we still have a net loss.

I thought roughly 50% of the County budget went to APS despite the fact that only something like 19% of residents have children?

It does. The crazies here want 100% of the budget to schools

no but look it up, pretty sure other counties give a higher %

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% of 0 is 0.

The % doesn’t matter, funding the cost matters.

If you are concerned about the %, raise taxes to maintain 50%.

The percentage absolutely does matter. Especially to the 19% of the county population that does not have school age children - which is not me - I have 2 and another 2 no longer in APS. But the county has competing costs, some just as important as schools, and the answer cannot always be raise taxes to fund all the costs that each group of various constituents think are necessary.

Throwing out arbitrary % limits to spend on education is meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cutting the aquatics field trip will save almost no money. APS barely funds field trips. Mostly to planetarium, outdoor lab and pools. PTAs fundraise for Jamestown and the like.

Kids like pool week. No sense in cutting it. And APS is not going to fund something better.

Careful. I'm sure people would like to eliminate the Planetarium trips, too. Don't remind them!

How much does APS spend on the planetarium?

The planetarium nonprofit “The Friends” took over a lot of the spending during a previous round of budget cuts. There are many things APS used to fund that are now funded through donations and by volunteers. I guess it’s a trend all over the country. The expectations for government services are just much lower than in the olden days.

are you kidding? in the olden days, my school system sure as h*ll did not have its own auditorium or private forest.

IMO, the planetarium, the outdoor forest, and sending kids to TJHSST are the 3 things that stand out for APS. Both the planetarium and outdoor lab are unique to APS and EVERY student has access. TJHSST, I've gone back and forth on; but I've settled on it being a good thing. Maybe some costs can be reduced/recovered with scaled transportation fees or maybe Arlington TJ parents can expand carpooling; but participating in the program does not cost more per pupil than APS spends and provides a very unique opportunity that APS cannot provide.

Therefore, IMO, these 3 aspects of APS are worth the relatively minimal investments. The real luxury items are all the option programs and iPads for every student through 8th grade. These are the first things that should be looked at the very instant step one - eliminating the fluff at Syphax, eliminating all the paid vacation for Syphax employees, and reducing the Superintendent's benefit package (does that position still get a provided car???) - is done. Then get the County serious about coordinating ART routes and get all 6th - 12th graders off yellow school buses.

I agree with you that every kid doesn’t need an iPad, but I have never understood why people think option programs are so expensive. It’s not like kids in option programs would all move to private. APS would still have to pay for teachers, principals and buy textbooks etc if the schools became neighborhood schools.

1. Additional transportation. yes, many would be on buses anyway, but to the same schools and not buses collecting students from across the county.
2. Can't just hire any old teacher or re-allocate teachers from other schools. You need bilingual/Spanish-speaking teachers for immersion; Montessori requires specialized training; etc.
3. Montessori also requires more teachers - an additional teacher in every classroom.
4. Paying extra for additional/different materials and curriculum.
5. IB programs/schools require a fee to the IB Organization to be recognized as an IB school.
6. IB teachers also require specialized training.
7. Running multiple options is a collective expense.

Can’t speak for others but Montessori is priced in the middle of all Arl ES. Did you see the AEM post showing cost per pupil? Montessori teachers should be certified as such but they do that on their own dime - they get no reimbursement or extra pay compared with other teachers. Also, the APS Montessori model is 2 adults, not two teachers in a class (and I don’t think you’ll find an APS Montessori class with two teachers even though there should be). And Montessori materials last for years or decades, literally, some teachers will carry some same materials their whole careers. That means the annual costs are lower because you’re not buying whole new textbooks and tools every SY. Again, look at the cost per pupil. There are neighborhood NArl ES significantly higher than all options. Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% of 0 is 0.

The % doesn’t matter, funding the cost matters.

If you are concerned about the %, raise taxes to maintain 50%.

The percentage absolutely does matter. Especially to the 19% of the county population that does not have school age children - which is not me - I have 2 and another 2 no longer in APS. But the county has competing costs, some just as important as schools, and the answer cannot always be raise taxes to fund all the costs that each group of various constituents think are necessary.

If you're a 23-year-old renting a Rosslyn condo, and you'll move back to Iowa in a couple years, then it's rational to not care about the schools. Every homeowner in Arlington is invested in the health of APS, whether or not they have school-age children.

It blows my mind how many of my neighbors have told me they don't care about school funding. They're failing to see that our home prices go up the way they do because of the premium people pay for a great school district (yes, of course location is also a factor). But improving the schools benefits everyone who's invested in some way in the community.

Unfortunately, I don't think APS has been known as a great school district for several years. When my family moved to Arlington 20 years ago, APS was known for limiting the number of students in each classroom and paying teachers some of the best salaries around. That is what made APS a great school district. Those days are long gone. I also think APS continues to see the success that they do, in large part, because of highly educated and involved parents - like the ones on this thread.

All but one of my kids are out of APS now and one, in fact, just started teaching HS in Fairfax this past fall. I care about school funding but I think the SB and the past couple superintendents have been irresponsible with how some of the money has been spent and I have no desire to give them a blank check as some on this thread seem to think appropriate. I would love a return to the days when APS was known for great teacher pay and small class sizes but I don't see that happening under this superintendent.

As far as my home value, I'm not so sure people are paying a premium to live in my neighborhood because of APS. In the past several years, more than half the families who recently bought a house on the couple surrounding blocks are sending their children to private and Catholic school. I think most are paying a premium for a short commute to DC, public transportation nearby, easy access to 66, and handful of businesses, shops and restaurants they can walk to. Would they more to my neighborhood if the school district was horrible - probably not. But they are willing to tolerate decent because the send their kids elsewhere.

What you say about your neighborhood should mean it should be the same in SArl neighborhoods…but it isn’t. Why? Because of the underlying value provided by the local school that is thought of as good. Otherwise, people just needing to drive to Dc and sending their kids to private would just live in Green Valley too right?
Also, I would you your generation of resident is part of the problem. You feel like you paid your school dues and don’t want to pay more. I find it disappointing that the Garveys and others of this generation (CivFed fanatics) have been restricting APS spending since early 2000s because they just felt like APS was getting too much of the budget pie. We are where we are because that generation wanted to keep redirecting public funds to their own wants, post-schooling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

Any positions where certified teachers are in an office while vacancies exist in classrooms, for one. That’s just grossly incompetent/ negligent. DEI can be one person. Content areas can have a coordinator, a supervisor, a director, or a specialist, but not all 4. I’d start there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

You say this like it's hard. Let's start with the cabinet: Mann is good. Graves is good. I have no opinion of Crawford. Mayo and Stockton can both go because both were at least adjacent to scandals in Maryland districts and they both do jobs that SHOULD be done by a superintendent who wants to be more than a figurehead who hands out balloons.

Stockton was Chief of Staff in MCPS and therefore likely complicit when their recently fired Sueprintendant allowed a known sexual harrasser to be promoted multiple times. Mayo was the head of HR in Baltimore County when he did not disclose income from SUPES Academy, a company that helped school districts train administrators. The superintendent at the time, Dallas Dance, was sentenced to six months in prison for falsifying financial disclosure statements submitted to the school system. Mayo's incorrect financial disclosure statements were later destroyed. Instead of facing his own investigation, Mayo came here to APS.
https://davidplymyer.com/2018/09/04/baltimore-county-schools-record-purge-more-significant-than-public-realizes/
You may recall that our last permanent superintendent, Patrick Murphy, was also disgraced and fired in MCPS for his involvement in the MCPS scandal.

I think the finance office has grown ridiculously in recent years, so I would cut Mark McLaughlin. Cut the Director of Labor Relations, Stephanie Maltz, which is a position that no other local school district doing collective bargaining has. We have both an executive director of curriculum and instruction and a Director of Curriculum and Instruction. That's the same position, cut one of them, I don't care which. I'd definitely cut from some of the publicity and "community relations" team.

I would gladly go on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

You say this like it's hard. Let's start with the cabinet: Mann is good. Graves is good. I have no opinion of Crawford. Mayo and Stockton can both go because both were at least adjacent to scandals in Maryland districts and they both do jobs that SHOULD be done by a superintendent who wants to be more than a figurehead who hands out balloons.

Stockton was Chief of Staff in MCPS and therefore likely complicit when their recently fired Sueprintendant allowed a known sexual harrasser to be promoted multiple times. Mayo was the head of HR in Baltimore County when he did not disclose income from SUPES Academy, a company that helped school districts train administrators. The superintendent at the time, Dallas Dance, was sentenced to six months in prison for falsifying financial disclosure statements submitted to the school system. Mayo's incorrect financial disclosure statements were later destroyed. Instead of facing his own investigation, Mayo came here to APS.
https://davidplymyer.com/2018/09/04/baltimore-county-schools-record-purge-more-significant-than-public-realizes/
You may recall that our last permanent superintendent, Patrick Murphy, was also disgraced and fired in MCPS for his involvement in the MCPS scandal.

I think the finance office has grown ridiculously in recent years, so I would cut Mark McLaughlin. Cut the Director of Labor Relations, Stephanie Maltz, which is a position that no other local school district doing collective bargaining has. We have both an executive director of curriculum and instruction and a Director of Curriculum and Instruction. That's the same position, cut one of them, I don't care which. I'd definitely cut from some of the publicity and "community relations" team.

I would gladly go on.

The entire department of Climate & Culture is a waste. Huge expenses for minimal return.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eyes on the prize, people! The per-seat cost of HBW/Shriver was exactly the same as the per-seat cost of the Hamm expansion. Totally agree, recent building expenses were absurd, but what's done is done. Let's focus on how to get class sizes smaller and how to actually pay great staff competitively with Fairfax. Debating slides and "the Heights" and the Outdoor Lab won't get us there. It will require sustained pressure to the County Board to prioritize schools over their myriad vanity projects, pressure on state elected officials to fix the ridiculous underfunding of Arlington schools relative to our neighboring districts, and pressure on the School Board to cut more Syphax bloat.

Ok, I'll bite, please identify which exact positions you would cut in Syphax. I'll wait.

You say this like it's hard. Let's start with the cabinet: Mann is good. Graves is good. I have no opinion of Crawford. Mayo and Stockton can both go because both were at least adjacent to scandals in Maryland districts and they both do jobs that SHOULD be done by a superintendent who wants to be more than a figurehead who hands out balloons.

Stockton was Chief of Staff in MCPS and therefore likely complicit when their recently fired Sueprintendant allowed a known sexual harrasser to be promoted multiple times. Mayo was the head of HR in Baltimore County when he did not disclose income from SUPES Academy, a company that helped school districts train administrators. The superintendent at the time, Dallas Dance, was sentenced to six months in prison for falsifying financial disclosure statements submitted to the school system. Mayo's incorrect financial disclosure statements were later destroyed. Instead of facing his own investigation, Mayo came here to APS.
https://davidplymyer.com/2018/09/04/baltimore-county-schools-record-purge-more-significant-than-public-realizes/
You may recall that our last permanent superintendent, Patrick Murphy, was also disgraced and fired in MCPS for his involvement in the MCPS scandal.

I think the finance office has grown ridiculously in recent years, so I would cut Mark McLaughlin. Cut the Director of Labor Relations, Stephanie Maltz, which is a position that no other local school district doing collective bargaining has. We have both an executive director of curriculum and instruction and a Director of Curriculum and Instruction. That's the same position, cut one of them, I don't care which. I'd definitely cut from some of the publicity and "community relations" team.

I would gladly go on.

Yes- I agree with you. Climate and culture can be improved by making needed cuts, keeping class sizes small, and paying the staff that work directly with kids better. Curriculum and Instruction sounds great. What do they do? The teachers do the planning. One person. McLaughlin wants to manage a huge department, and I don’t know why they’ve given him so many new positions. He has never handled finances for an organization this size, and he is awful to the people that work with and for him, and Mayo and Pearson (soooo many layers!) know it. They should go just for that. Publicity and community relations can’t fix this. Huge departments that should be cut by at least half. How many superintendents do we need?