APS budget is unacceptable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Roll call. What silly/ridiculous things have you seen in APS that serve little to no purpose and could be cut??

The entire PR department. Why does a school division need so much PR?

Seven people…why can’t each department write their own news?

I would like to present my own radical proposition. How about we invest in quality programs with student-facing positions, rather than seven people who can spin positive PR that make the programs sound like higher quality than they are?

The have 7 people? That's ridiculous. 3 at most.

Plus they have a tv crew of 4 in the same department, producing videos for Board meeting, so 1 in PR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a no-brainer. Cut Duran and his entire cabinet. Can't see what any of them are doing. Probably need to reach down and cut some assistant superintendents, executive directors and directors. But APS could probably claw back $2-3 million just with Duran and his 'cabinet' of do-nothings.

The best answer in this thread.

100%
As a taxpayer I refuse to advocate for more money for the schools until I see a true effort to stop the waste of resources.

The schools don’t need more money they need to stop wasting money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Roll call. What silly/ridiculous things have you seen in APS that serve little to no purpose and could be cut??

The entire PR department. Why does a school division need so much PR?

Seven people…why can’t each department write their own news?

I would like to present my own radical proposition. How about we invest in quality programs with student-facing positions, rather than seven people who can spin positive PR that make the programs sound like higher quality than they are?

The have 7 people? That's ridiculous. 3 at most.

Plus they have a tv crew of 4 in the same department, producing videos for Board meeting, so 1 in PR.

Nevermind that all these HQ folks get about a zillion holidays and vacation days. If they're rarely working, of course you need lots of people!

[Anonymous]

Too many positions not contributing to students education, too much focus on DEI and a school board completely running unchecked and actively against having top schools tripping over each other to show how equitable APS is. This is what everyone in Arlington votes for every time and it blows my mind. We need new voices that actually care about our students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we shut cut the APS aquatics program.

Doesn't this make money for APS?

I think they mean the 3rd and 8th grade units where they bus kids to the pool.

I doubt that program will ever end since a large number of Arlington students don’t know how to swim. Even junior high age kids.

This swimming competency initiative goes back some 50 plus years and has a ton of support, kind of like the planetarium which almost got the axe.

I'd love if they dropped the field trips to the pool and instead just offered APS kids in certain grades free access to public swim times at APS pools. It would cost APS very little, but would improve access and encourage kids to go routinely to actually learn to swim.

There is already free swimming for kids at APS pools on Saturday afternoons- the exact hours vary by pool. They should advertise. I think they reduced price classes for low income students already too. Maybe make them free for kids in the grades that usually have swim lessons? I agree no one is learning how to swim in a week.

[Anonymous]

What I'd really like to stop are these "Friday Five" emails and texts etc. Just send group emails when there is truly something to report. We are busy people with jobs and kids. I don't have time to read something -- really multiple things -- from APS every single week. You guys know we already get communications from the actual schools our kids are in, right?

[Anonymous]

I don't mind APS having 1 or 2 PR people. But if they actually have 7, that is bananas. Shut that down and keep Outdoor Lab open.

[Anonymous]

Agree. Before cutting any programs for students they must trim central office staff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we shut cut the APS aquatics program.

Doesn't this make money for APS?

I think they mean the 3rd and 8th grade units where they bus kids to the pool.

I doubt that program will ever end since a large number of Arlington students don’t know how to swim. Even junior high age kids.

This swimming competency initiative goes back some 50 plus years and has a ton of support, kind of like the planetarium which almost got the axe.

I'd love if they dropped the field trips to the pool and instead just offered APS kids in certain grades free access to public swim times at APS pools. It would cost APS very little, but would improve access and encourage kids to go routinely to actually learn to swim.

The problem is how to do that equitably for students from various backgrounds. Not all families have the time, resources, ore desire to go swimming on their own. Their kids will miss out.

But is swimming really a critical life skill that schools MUST teach? I say no. And yes I know a kid drowned 50 years ago, and that's the impetus for the program. But today, kids are dying of fentanyl overdoses. Let's reorder our priorities. You don't keep a program just because it's been around for 50 years.

[Anonymous]

Kind of rich that the Arlington teacher now going after TJ and options programs was pushing pushing pushing for the virtual learning program for a long time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Roll call. What silly/ridiculous things have you seen in APS that serve little to no purpose and could be cut??

The entire PR department. Why does a school division need so much PR?

Seven people…why can’t each department write their own news?

I would like to present my own radical proposition. How about we invest in quality programs with student-facing positions, rather than seven people who can spin positive PR that make the programs sound like higher quality than they are?

The have 7 people? That's ridiculous. 3 at most.

Applies to most departments.

Plus they have a tv crew of 4 in the same department, producing videos for Board meeting, so 1 in PR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unpopular opinion how to save money: Do residency checks, and the whole enrollment address verification annually. Unenroll, rinse repeat. Cut all the live translators at every single event and meeting unless they are unpaid volunteers. Preschoolers don’t need iPads, neither do young elementary students. Introduce in 4th or 5th grade. Cut the option programs with the lowest interest and enrollment. Like the 24 high school kids in dual immersion. Cut the bloated administrative apparatus. We do not need 50 DEI divisions at every school *and* at Syphax. Instead invest in teachers salaries, including SPED teachers, counselors, social workers. Hold firms who build for APS accountable, their proposals are far too expensive and they don’t get enough competition or scrutiny. It’s like the million dollar bus stop every time.

Written like someone who knows just enough without really knowing what they're talking about.

Residency checks for everyone every year would be too costly. They have already stepped up residency verification and that's made a significant difference at the individual school level where it's been most problematic.

Cut all the translators?! Seriously? Obviously you don't give a crap about other people being able to be engaged if they don't speak or understand fluent English. Doesn't affect you, so not important - got it.

You really believe there are only 24 students in the immersion program at Wakefield?

They are cutting administration - reorganizing central office and eliminating 20 positions. And I think you're exaggerating about 50 DEI positions at every school. Though they really should eliminate DEI at Syphax since they aren't doing anything.

Major construction projects come from bonds, not the regular operating budget. And our aging facilities need significant maintenance and upgrades.

Teachers are getting a raise, whether it's "enough" or not. It's what they can do with the limited budget.

But absolutely YES to eliminating much of the technology. Better for budget, better for actual teaching and learning. But first time school has to go "online," everyone will be outraged that each student doesn't have a device.

More frequent residency checks should not be that costly, since the infrastructure is already in place. The 100 students that were unenrolled just that one time at one school point to how extensive the problem is. There are currently no checks in high school. When there is this much hand wringing about the budget you have to get serious. Each extra student each year is a huge drain on resources, and costs real money, so yes, checks should be more frequent.

Re: translators. Not sure how much APS budgets for this, but I have spoken to the translators at dozens of event for years… from big board meetings to smaller community meetings to events where school tours are given and more. It’s fantastic APS offers this… but absolutely not worth it money-wise. The translators report minuscule participation (actual need, as in number of headsets handed out to enjoy live translation! 2, 1, or 0… ) pretty much every time.

The very low number of students in dual immersion (higher grades) was recently published by APS. It was truly incredibly low.

Agree on the need for aging building maintenance and expenses related to that.

Not 50 DEI positions at each school, but 1-5 per school times the number of schools (positions exist at every school) plus the entire division of DEI at Syphax - it adds up. It’s the teachers who see the real needs at each school and the support positions don’t take that into account properly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thinking about this more. Getting rid of outdoor lab and moving the employees to Arlington might make a ton of sense. You could sell the property and make a lot of cash. There’s nothing they teach there that couldn’t be done at an Arlington nature center. And since the overnights are now in jeopardy anyway due to the Oakridge thing. Why not get rid of it?

Ignorant. Thankfully, APS doesn’t own the outdoor lab or Murphy would have probably sold it back in 2010. It’s owned by a separate nonprofit. APS just pays for staffing.

With so many central office staff who do next-to-nothing for students…. cutting people who actually teach kids should not be the priority, ever.

Staff at the Outdoor Lab should be cut. The recent events and complaints are enough to have the non-profit owners hire qualified outdoor educators similar to other nonprofits.

Outdoor Lab staff was not the problem in "recent events and complaints."

Staffing is the #1 problem. The Science Director was removed from the oversight of the outdoor lab after many years of mismanagement. That's why there's now an onsite principal. Programs, including overnights originally had 3-4 staff on site at all times. It was only after the Science Director advised leaving one staff on site for overnights and not to be involved during overnight hours that the child molestation incident happened.

So, MORE staffing is needed.

Well where is that $$$ coming from? Someone on AEM is complaining about the cuts to Outdoor Lab, let's just close the whole thing down.

I think that the few local parents have fond memories and want to fight tooth and nail to preserve it, but if the budget is this dire, and it’s that expensive, just shut it down. We have several excellent nature centers that give free education, house animals, etc. it’s not the same, but I think there’s a lot of misplaced nostalgia at play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we shut cut the APS aquatics program.

Doesn't this make money for APS?

I think they mean the 3rd and 8th grade units where they bus kids to the pool.

I doubt that program will ever end since a large number of Arlington students don’t know how to swim. Even junior high age kids.

This swimming competency initiative goes back some 50 plus years and has a ton of support, kind of like the planetarium which almost got the axe.

I'd love if they dropped the field trips to the pool and instead just offered APS kids in certain grades free access to public swim times at APS pools. It would cost APS very little, but would improve access and encourage kids to go routinely to actually learn to swim.

The problem is how to do that equitably for students from various backgrounds. Not all families have the time, resources, ore desire to go swimming on their own. Their kids will miss out.

+1,000

[Anonymous]

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.