May 20, 2010—St. Louis—The SAB ended months of speculation by approving a resolution tonight for a bond issue to be placed on the August 3 ballot that will allow the district to borrow $155 million for facilities improvements .

At their May 13 meeting Board Attorney Allen Boston was instructed to write the resolution after a report from two members of a committee overseeing the community engagement process for the development of a facilities management plan. SAB Board Member Richard Gaines invited Regional Business Council Executive Director Kathy Osborn and St. Louis City NAACP President Claude Brown to provide an update about the Facilities Advisory Committee for Tomorrow’s Schools (FACTS). The FACTS was created by Mr. Gaines to lead the public relations effort to get a bond issue approved by the city’s voters.

Early in April, invitation letters signed by Gaines were sent to prospective committee members. The letters said in part, “We are assembling a small group of citizens to serve as an oversight committee for this process, which will review the process and evaluate feedback received from the community. I am writing today to invite you to serve as a member of this committee. We need your advice and judgment, but not an extensive amount of your time. Over the next couple of months, the committee will meet for 3-4 breakfast meetings, and material will be provided for your review in advance of each meeting. The first meeting of this oversight committee — which we are calling the “facilitating team” – is scheduled for April 12 at 7:30 AM in the Foundation Room at the SLPS office (801 N. 11^th St., St. Louis, MO 63101).

“Please note”, the letter continued, ”that the facilitating team’s role is limited to presenting the draft facility plan and receiving feedback – not promoting a referendum (italics ours), should that be the outcome of the process. The goal of this process is to hear the community’s voice as it relates to the critical facility challenges facing SLPS schools. With your help, we can make the community’s priorities for facility improvements a key component of our facilities plan. Thank you for your consideration.”

At last Thursday’s SAB meeting, Claude Brown said, “Richard Gaines put this committee together. He asked, told me to do it.” Brown’s words were noteworthy because Gaines has repeatedly described  the work of the engagement process as community led.  In reality, he is leading the community that is leading the process.

A team of 20 district administrators have been sent into the field to attend about 60 community meetings to present what is being called a plan, but which is merely a compendium of over $300 million in needs and a vague wish list for spending $155 million dollars.  A video, which was probably created by Unicom-Arc, is shown. The video which features SLPS graduates reminiscing about their school days, as well as aspirations for the future expressed by Supt. Adams, highlights needed repairs and the wish to update school buildings for technology and current safety standards.   In addition to the video, there is a four page booklet, a question/comment form and a feedback form, which are given to those in attendance.

For the benefit of readers who have not had the opportunity to attend one of these events or have not yet visited the SLPS.org website to learn more about FACTS, permit me to explain that three priorities have been identified underwhich improvements have been categorized.  The priorities are 1. Improving academic peformance of students, 2. Ensuring a safe, secure environment in all schools and 3. Promoting a healthy lifestyle for students.

Under the first priority improvements listed include providing every student with access to computers, technology and software, updating power and electrical service to accommodate classroom technology, adding pre-k classrooms, expanding the gifted program, upgrading libraries, science labs, auditoriums, restrooms and cafeterias, creating professional development space for teachers and improving athletic fields and facilities.

Under the second priority improvements listed include removing lead paint in classrooms serving children under the age of 6, replacing windows that have lead paint covered trim, repairing or replacing roofs to eliminate leaks and mold, removing hazardous materials such as asbestos and mold, improving security (lighting, cameras, locks and alarm systems), making fire safety upgrades, making playground equipment safer, and improving building conditions (indoor air quality, sidewalks, stairs, and athletic fields).

The third priority lists improvements such as renovating kitchens, upgrading playground equipment and constructing one or more centrally located multi-purpose sports facilities for athletic practices and events.

The lead abatement project has already been completed.  The SAB approved the $8.44 million project in 2009 not knowing where they would find the money to pay for it.  That money constitutes the lion’s share of this year’s $11 million budget deficit.  If the bond issue passes, the GOB will be reimbursed for this expense.

The Watch has been present at three of these community meetings.  They have varied in quality.  One of the presenters never mentioned that a bond issue was under consideration.  Another only mentioned it when questioned about how the district intended to pay for facilities improvements, but asked the audience for other suggestions regarding meeting the cost.  Although they all did a good job of outlining the district’s needs, some of the presenters did not seem well trained to answer questions or understand that community approval of a bond issue was at stake. Maybe the organizers’ strategy is to not emphasize the need for the bond issue approval yet, to just introduce the idea of the district’s dire needs.  To get this passed there will surely be a major publicity campaign leading up to August 3.

The information provided in the video and the four page booklet is vague about what will be done with the money.  Expanding gifted education is mentioned.  But, there are no specific capital improvements needed to expand gifted education.  There are costs involved in assisting teachers to acquire gifted certification but those costs would not be covered by these bonds.  The Watch asked Supt. Adams for clarification.  He explained that the school which will become the new gifted school, Mallinckrodt, needs to be air conditioned. Likewise, another cost is the creation of more pre-k classrooms.  Bathroom facilities for small children are the unnamed cost there.

Unicom-Arc is being paid $72,000 to design and implement a Community Engagement Program to receive public comments and input on a Facilities Improvement Plan for the period March 2010 through August 2010.  It is a shame they are not giving better value for that 72K.

Dr. Charlene Jones’ contract has also been extended until August 30, 2010. Jones was originally hired, “To develop, coordinate and supervise all SLPS activities regarding potential issues for the April 16, 2010 ballot for the period July 1, 2009 through April 30, 2010 in an amount not to exceed $60,000,”according to the September 10, 2009 consent agenda.  If the terms have not changed the district may pay her an additional $24,000 from the GOB for those four months because no amount was listed on the April 29th consent agenda for her services pending approval of the GOB budget in the same consent agenda. The ballot initiative was moved to August in all likelihood because the district would have had to cover the entire $200K cost of holding the election in April since there are no municipal elections in even years.  By holding the bond election during the August primary, they get to split the cost with the city and state.

At a FACTS presentation in the 8th Ward on May 17, Alderman Stephen Conway was present.  He noted that, “You have to tell people which schools are going to get the money and get the upgrades and not get neglected, which leads to their closure.”  Conway was specifically concerned about Sherman Elementary in his ward being, “on the chopping block”.  Sherman was scheduled to close after MGT of America submitted its Facilties Review last year.  Dr. Adams has expressed interest in keeping Sherman open, but the school was not included on the list of schools to receive new energy efficient windows this year.  Sherman, an Ittner designed building, has not received HVAC updates in any previous bond issues.  Conway expressed concern that southside schools were shortchanged in previous bond issues when the district was under federal oversight 25 years ago.  Since Kathy Osbourn made the point May 13, that revenue from the bond issue will only be used on buildings which will be open long term, Conway’s concerned are justified.  Enthusiasm for the bond issue may not be substantial in areas of the city whose schools will not benefit.

Conway, a CPA, also reacted to the presentation’s claim that approving the bond issue would not raise our taxes.  Noting that the new bond issue would replace one that is retiring, he reminded those in attendance that if it is not approved, “our taxes would go down.”

On May 13th, Osbourne reported that 52 meetings had occurred so far and that 1000 people had attended them.  She also reported that 1000 had visited the district’s webpage devoted to FACTS.  She summarized the feedback and key findings they received.  “There is overall support for facilities improvement,” she said.  She recommended moving forward with utilizing the bond issue to improve our school facilities.  She said the members of the committee are ready to support the effort to get it approved by a vote of the people, “in any way we can”.

The bonds are called Qualified School Construction Bonds or QSCBs.  They are a  federal debt instrument created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, aka “the stimulus”.  QSCBs allow schools to borrow at nominal or zero percent for the rehabilitation, repair and equipping of schools. In addition, QSCB funds can be used to purchase land on which a public school will be built. The QSCB purchaser receives a federal tax credit in lieu of receiving an interest payment. That is what makes them attractive.

They cannot be used to cover day to day maintenance, so they will not impact much of the $20.7 million contract the district approved with Aramark to provide facilties managment services for the 2010-11 school year.  But if a roof is replaced with funds from the bonds rather than repaired, that will lower the cost of the Aramark maintenance contract.

The four page FACTS pamphlet lists the FACTS Community Team Members.  In addition to Osborn and Brown, there are 17 other prominent citizens.  They are Local 420 President Mary Armstrong, Missouri Growth Assn. Executive Vice President Ann Auer, Urban League President James Buford, Judge Anne Marie Clarke, Black Alliance for Educational Opportunity Executive Director Bertha Gilkey, Harris Stowe State University President Dr. Henry Givens, Jr., Civic Progress Executive Director Tom Irwin, Clergy Coalition Member Rev. Sammie Jones, State Rep. Tishaura Jones, Alderman Terry Kennedy, Clergy Coalition Member Dr. Doug Petty, Twenty-seventh Ward Committeeman Curtis Royston, Southside Wellness Center Executive Director Ollie Stewart, City Democratic Central Committee Chair Brian Wahby, retired SLPS administrator Ida Woolfolk, and Alderwoman Phyllis Young. 

Among this illustrious group are several supporters of charter schools and school vouchers, a former school board member appointed by Mayor Slay, three former school board candidates, Deputy Mayor and Education Liaison for Mayor Slay Robyn Wahby’s husband and Richard Gaines’ wife. But given the presence of three business group leaders, five politicians, and two clergymen, it appears the committee was put together with getting the bond issue approved in mind.  Most of these people represent constituencies or have influence in parts of the community whose support will be needed to get out the vote for this endeavour.  Notably absent is anyone from the elected Board of Education. The south and southwest sides of the city are also curiously unrepresented given their voting stength.  The SAB may well be taking these votes for granted.

Bond issues require 57.1% approval to pass.  So this undertaking is a gamble. The district has been consistently successful passing them in the past under Charlene Jones’ capable leadership.  The body politic has changed, however, since the last successful bond issue campaign. Enrollment has dropped by almost 20,000. Ten thousand city children now attend charter schools.  That is probably why several charter school supporters have had their egos stroked by being included on the facilitating team.

Whether charter school parents will vote for a bond issue that their children will not benefit from remains to be seen.  The division of the constituency for public education into two camps, the SLPS and charter schools, throws a wild card into the process of getting bonds passed.  It is going to be interesting to see whether the district can overcome that obstacle.

Given that they have decided to move forward, the SAB appears confident that they will succeed.

Calendar

May 22, Saturday, MISSOURI ADVISORY COMMITTEE to the U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS, John Cook School of Business Auditorium, St. Louis University, 3674 Lindell,St. Louis, Missouri 63108, “Civil Rights Implications of Educational Opportunities in Urban Public School Settings and Education Reform in Missouri….St. Louis Public Schools (SLPS)”, 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.   June 8 , Tuesday, regular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108   June 8 , Tuesday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School Dance Studio, 1004 N. Jefferson    

Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to SLS_Watch@yahoo.com

Questions for the Watch?

Letters to the Editor?

Stories to contribute? News tips?

Send them to SLS_Watch@yahoo.com

1. tmblrmailfor liked this
2. slpswatch posted this