Save BSD Music Programs — Attend the School Board Meeting
We had another great music advocacy meeting last night with about 20 parents and teachers attending. So much groundwork is being laid, but I will elaborate on that in other messages.
Our #1 short-term goal is to overflow the room at the board meeting this Monday, June 18th
Beaverton School District Administration Center 6:00pm
16550 SW Merlo Road, Beaverton, OR 97006
|
1) Wear RED and bring a homemade sign.Sign Examples Include:
– “Music Makes a Difference” – “I Support Comprehensive Education” – “Educate The Whole Child” – “Budget Reduction Days Will Save Our Teachers & Our Programs” 2) Arrive EARLY to get a seat. Carpool if possible. Overflow parking is available across the street at Merlo Station High School. Please do NOT skip the meeting. We NEED a large turnout for impact. Dress for the weather in case some time has to be spent outside of the building. We had about 120 supporters show up last time, we want to DOUBLE IT this time. Bring a friend… bring three.
***If you plan to speak***
Arrive by 5:15pm and proceed directly to the front desk in the main lobby. Fill out at blue card if you wish to speak during the initial hearing, yellow if you wish to speak during the “community engagement” section. We should try to balance blue cards and yellow cards to make sure we fill the time and that all are heard. Make sure you write your speech in advance and rehearse it prior to the meeting. It should time out to 2 minutes or less. Call Jennifer Mohr if you want to speak but need advice about what to say or how to prepare: 503 764 8877 or jennifer_mohr@me.com. 3) During the meeting, stand silently when someone is speaking about the music programs. Please be respectful and do not speak or make any other unnecessary sounds during the meeting. |
Basically, we need a repeat of what we did on June 4th—HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE wearing RED SHIRTS and CARRYING SIGNS. The advocacy leadership team will organize speakers to put forward our platform, but we need BODIES (students, parents, and teachers) standing there and backing us up. The overall communication will be IT’S NOT TOO LATE (to fix the budget) and WE ARE WATCHING and WE ARE NOT GOING AWAY.
We need an all-out EFFORT from EVERYBODY on this list to spread the word, attend the meeting (wearing RED) and bring two friends. Offer to drive them or buy them coffee. Whatever you need to do. Make it fun!
****You can invite people using this FACEBOOK EVENT****
Save BSD Music Programs — Attend the School Board Meeting #2
On June 4th, we had over 130 people at the meeting. Let’s use every tool we have to get people there AGAIN on June 18th. Let’s double the turnout this time. Please work as hard for this as you did to get the petition signed. 1440 people signed that petition. What if all of them showed up at the board meeting on June 18th? Even 20% of that amount would be a victory. We need to have large numbers to get press, recognition and credibility. Please leave instruments at home, carry your sign, politely move chairs to make room for everyone, silently stand to show support when one of our own talks on the mic.
Speeches will:
• Review the cuts (and present music allocation grid for all 60 positions) and affects to class size, comprehensive programs
• Explain that we do not accept a transfer of blame for the cuts to the legislature or the levy that didn’t pass; we are holding the board and the district accountable
• Remind the board that it is not too late, and that they have alternatives (someone will read John Burns’ letter aloud)
• Remind the board that cutting days is the better solution for ALL students, not just music programs
• Demand that the board reopen the budget process on June 18th or set another meeting in July to reopen it
• Explain the consequences of not reopening the budget: programs cut (with not intention to reinstate?) class sizes skyrocket… and our group grows even more insistent.
• Remind the board that the administration has created this problem by adding 54 new positions and not covering them with days, and they need to start by putting a hold on those positions.
• Our challenge to board is: are you voting for 54 new positions with theoretical value rather than supporting positions with proven value (music/pe/library)? If the administration wants the new stuff, go get furlough days!
Each speaker should:
• Write a 2-minute speech, rehearse it at home the night before, and deliver it powerfully at the meeting
• Have a handout of your speech to give to each board member after speaking
• E-mail us a copy of your speech by Sunday, June 17th.
More instructions and communication between speakers will be needed. Take initiative and stay tuned.
MUSIC TEACHERS, BAND AND CHOIR PARENTS & STUDENTS:
38,000 CHILDREN WHO RECEIVE EDUCATION FROM THE BSD ARE DEPENDING ON YOU TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN!!!
• blast your e-mail list
• call your friends
• talk to parents during field day, or music/sports/graduation/end of year events this week
Volunteers needed:
• use your school roster/directory
• make cold calls to parents to talk about the budget and invite them to the meeting
Response Letter to School Board
Dear (school board member),
I am writing to express my disappointment in your vote approving the 2012-2013 budget. While I understand it was a difficult decision, I believe the facts for voting against the budget remain persuasive. The cuts in your current budget will:
•Reduce Music Specialists by 30%
•Shuffle music teachers to positions they are unprepared to teach
•Reduce most music positions to halftime
This is not acceptable—cutting music in order to increase other non-essentials is irresponsible. Replacing proven, reliable, and well-loved programs with new, untested programs is a risky path. Educational programs come and go (remember CIM and CAM?), but music has remained an important part of a well round education for centuries.
I ask that you re-open negotiations on the budget and either cut days to retain music or slow the implementation of new programs in order to retain music specialists. A single furlough day would result in the retention of all music specialists cut.
Music has been part of the Beaverton school district for fifty years, it must continue to be for the next fifty.
Additionally, Superintendent Rose, at the budget meeting on Monday, used his comment time to address those members of the public and school staff who were present and advocating for more furlough days and the retention of music teachers. I would like to respond to three points he made:
Why aren’t / weren’t those of us advocating for furlough days, lobbying Salem for more education dollars?
Many of us have, do, and will continue to lobby Salem. Many of us gave our time to make phone calls for the district’s levy this past November. We are strong advocates for the schools and fully understand that any long-term solution requires the cultivation of a stronger source of revenue. The implication that we are complainers who gripe at the board, but are unwilling to fight for the long-term success of our schools is false.
The budget and its effects are not Superintendent Rose’s fault. They are the result of under-funding and are decisions forced by this reality.
It is true that the district was horribly under-funded by Salem this year. It is not true that the district had to make all of the decisions they did. Certain allocations were increased at the expense of teacher jobs. Furlough days were minimized after repeated evidence that both parents and staff supported a ten-day cut. These are decisions the district must own—they cannot be pawned off on the state. Shifting the argument to state allocation should not be a way for the district to conceal its own intents.
Why did the advocacy groups show up so late in the process—literally hours before the final vote.
Understanding a district budget is a difficult, time-consuming process. The budget and many of its ramifications were not fully understood until two weeks before the final session. Many of the changes were buried in pages of documentation and required a working understanding of previous budgets to fully comprehend. Other concerns were brought up at previous comment sessions and were not responded to. Verifying the veracity of our claims and making sure that what we communicated to parents and student was true took time. In retrospect, looking at the timeline for the budget process, it is a minor miracle advocacy groups were able to respond meaningful in the small time given.
If you find these arguments convincing, then it follows that action should be taken. That action is the re-opening of the budget and the consideration of more furlough days. I ask on behalf of Beaverton students, current and future, that you retain music—it is vital to a quality education.
Sincerely,
Tom Colett
The Budget Vote Was Disappointing
The Budget Vote Was Disappointing
Dear Board Members & Superintendent
Dr. Jeff Rose, Superintendent
LeeAnn Larsen, Chair
Karen Cunningham
Tom Quillin
Mary Vanderweele
Sarah Smith
Jeff Hicks
Linda Degman
I can only say how disappointing it was to watch you vote in favor of the proposed budget that was balanced on the back of our children. How could the majority of the Board avoid talking about what we having been asking for since the beginning? There was no explanation, only statements to say you didn’t like doing what you were about to do. However, the Board did it anyway, and you had options to do something different that would preserve programs and class room sizes.
Who is to blame?
Dr. Rose opened his prepared speech by saying this wasn’t the Board’s fault, and that the Beaverton Community should focus our energies elsewhere.
- We understand the school funding system is broken.
- We understand this is a state-wide issue.
- We understand the recent levy wasn’t successful, and could have lessened the impact.
- We understand this isn’t your fault personally.
However,
- We believe it is YOUR responsibility to find a way to bridge the gap in times of crisis.
Instead the Board chose to take the most drastic approach of crippling beloved, viable, and enriching programs, while saddling those remaining teachers with unrealistic classroom sizes. We may all be to blame at some point, but at the last minute the Board could have chosen to make a difference.
Innovations over Preservation?
It was ironic that after hearing so many testimonials requesting that the current programs be maintained, the Board proceeded to have an extended open discussion and vote about the desire to start a new on-line course program, and begin late starts to add more time for teachers to collaborate. Teachers with classes over forty students won’t have time to work on collaboration – they will be buried with unmanageable classroom sizes and papers to grade. It wasn’t lost on the entire audience that the Board is proposing to spend money and cut class time to start new programs that don’t have a track record for improving the student’s comprehensive educational experience. This approach is not sustainable for providing quality education.
In contrast to uncharted and expensive “innovations”, we do have a track record of and know for certain the following:
- Music improves student’s emotional intelligence, self esteem, and develops them in ways that are vital for adulthood.
- Librarians improve student’s access to information, reading opportunities, and research skills – critical life skills for post-high school success.
- Reasonable class room sizes provide student’s opportunities to learn, focus, and receive the necessary attention to command a subject matter.
These programs are sustainable in the development of our children’s emotional and academic education. They are proven to make a difference
Flawed Community Involvement Process
We were very disappointed to hear the Superintendant imply he knew the cuts would be just like this as early as last Summer/Fall when he came on board. Last fall if the community had been told the proposed impacts and that class sizes would soar to 40+, that key educational development programs would be slashed, and that librarians would be eliminated, perhaps the levy would have been successful. To make matters worse, our opinions were solicited in the budget teaching sessions, yet the budget outcome does not resemble the results of the surveys and public input. Why was our time and opinion wasted on surveys, budget teaching sessions, and budget hearings if the Board already planned to cut staff levels so severely? This was a slap in the face of public process!
What is the priority in times of Crisis?
Its unfortunate the Board had community-supported options available to minimize the impacts of the deficit. Instead of trying to save a sinking ship by plugging the holes and staying the course”, the Board has chosen to pursue alternatives for new programs and innovations that distract from saving lives and getting us to safe harbor. When we have been rescued by stable funding, and are sitting in drydock for overhaul, that is the time for innovations to be explored. Why throw the children overboard in order to have more room to talk about how to build a better ship?
Disappointment wasn’t your only option
Clearly there were other options to explore, as several budget committee members could not vote for approval of the proposed budget. Even the Chair, John Burns, spoke against it at budget committee meetings and up until the very last minute at the Board Meeting on Monday. Then the final vote was not a full consensus. There may have been more pressure to approve something that very evening rather than approve the best option for our children – it was written on the face of several board members.
I personally have been involved with the development of public agency annual budgets for over 20 years. There is always the option to stay the course, provide the services of the core mission, and avoid extras that are nice but not necessary. In the Beaverton School District case, there were options that didn’t balance the budget on the back of the students. I’m very disappointed that the majority of you weren’t able to find the courage to do the right thing by staying the course with core programs at this time of crisis.
Moving Forward
A very heartfelt “thank you” to Board Members Degman and VanderWeele for their uncommon courage to see through the tough choice, to vote intelligently, and for standing up for what is best for the students. They understand the core mission to serve the student’s best interest. For that, many hundreds of us applaud your support.
Please know we understand you have a tough job. However, the advocates for our children will continue to respectfully request that you revise the intent of the 2012-13 budget that was approved Monday. There are ways to make changes – Oregon Budget law allows options for change – with due process and public involvement and hearings. I know that advocates will continue to be fully engaged in finding a better solution for our current and future students.
Sincerely
(sent via email)
Erica Rooney
June 4th School Board Meeting RECAP
JUNE 4TH
SCHOOL BOARD MEETING
RECAP
I’m seeing RED—and I couldn’t be happier! Thank you to everyone who came out tonight, who made a sign, who delivered a speech. This was exactly what we needed. Even though the board didn’t vote our way, the they and superintendent were certainly moved by our presence. It will not be easy forget our red shirts! The board really responded to the students. They mentioned how much it meant to see them there. They represented us well with their eloquent, confident speeches along side those of parents and teachers.
Please read the attached letter entitled, “A Different Budget” by BSD budget committee chair John Burns (former Aloha High School band parent). The budget committee is a group of 14 members including the 7 board members and 7 members at large (volunteers from the community). John Burns was at our advocacy meeting last night to answer questions and he kindly submitted his public comment for today directly to the board via e-mail in order to yield more time for our organization to present during the limited public comment section (which was originally set for only 15 minutes). Ultimately, the board let that part of the meeting run long so that more of us could be heard. I wanted you all to be able to read John’s letter . He has an extremely cogent argument for how the board should be handling the budget process and the budget itself. The letter raises many questions about the need for so many cuts, and it is a good starting place for us to strategize our next moves over the coming days and weeks. Most of all, John reminds us and the board that the budget is a year-round process, and that THE BOARD CAN MAKE CHANGES AT ANY TIME.
Here is something important that we all need to understand: the superintendent and central office administration answer to the school board, not the other way around. It is the school board that receives the schools’ money directly from the state. They are the true custodians and protectors of that money and of this district. Let’s make sure the board does not forget that. Let’s make sure they take the right action for our kids. Sure, the legislature handed us a bum deal, but we can at least find the right way to spend those funds. In that regard, the current budget is flawed. I will elaborate more on that at Thursday’s advocacy meeting at Baja Fresh on 124th & Scholls, 7PM.
A few notes about the meeting as a whole:
While music and the arts are losing, “collaboration time” is winning. The board is in the process of implementing a new late-start schedule to allow more collaboration time for teachers. One of the major issues they discussed tonight was whether to move forward more slowly with the implementation of those plans. TIME IS MONEY. The board knows this, so they and the district are working on the problem of justifying to the public the reason for the increase in collaboration time (and the decrease in instructional time that is the cost). They believe collaboration time is useful and worthwhile, but they need a carefully-implemented communication strategy to get parents to agree with them and support it.
Why the board and the district think it’s okay for new programs like this to be implemented while we are experiencing severe budget cuts, I cannot fathom. I believe the additional late-start is not necessary. Here’s why: under the new budget and accompanying district-wide specials schedule, all elementary teachers will already gain an additional 45-minutes of weekly, administratively-directed collaboration time built into their schedule. That’s because music and pe teachers will each teach classes of 90+ students once per day by taking all classes of one grade level to the gym for activities/rhythms/choir etc. (we are not yet sure what we will be asked to teach during that time.) For example, in schools where there are three sections of each grade-level, the music teacher would teach three classes of students (90+ children) while being supported by two classified instructional assistants (the tech and media IAs) for 45-minutes while the classroom teachers have their PLC (professional learning community, aka “collaboration time”). In schools with a six-day rotation, the music teacher would teach this combined class three days per rotation, and the pe teacher would do the other three days.
Two board members voted in our favor: Linda Degman and Mary Vanderwheele. All others voted to approve the budget including cuts to music. If you wrote a letter to the board members last week asking for consideration, please write them a follow-up letter by 9PM tomorrow. We need to light up the board members’ inboxes tomorrow. Repeat what you said in your testimony and add any responses you have based on what you saw and heard at the meeting last night. If you are just coming in to this conversation, now would be a good time to send your first letter to the board. (See talking points below.) Plan to attend the next board meeting School Board Business Meeting, June 18, 2012, Administration Center, 16550 SW Merlo Rd., Beaverton, OR 97006, 6:30 p.m. If we do these two things, we will have a chance at getting the board to revisit the budget this summer. (The board does meet over the summer and there is time to make changes all the way up until the first day of school; remember, all of the board members who voted “yes” tonight did so holding their noses, so to speak. I believe they can be persuaded.) If we don’t do these two things, then the cuts will most certainly take place and the budget will play out as planned. We need to keep blowing up the phones and stuffing the e-mail boxes!!!
— Site Administrator
Superintendent of Beaverton Schools
Dr. Jeff Rose Jeff_Rose@beaverton.k12.or.us
School Board Members
Karen Cunningham Karen_Cunningham@beaverton.k12.or.us
Tom Quillin Tom_Quillin@beaverton.k12.or.us
Mary Vanderweele Mary_VanderWeele@beaverton.k12.or.us
Sarah Smith Sarah_Smith@beaverton.k12.or.us
LeeAnn Larsen LeeAnn_Larsen@beaverton.k12.or.us
Jeff Hicks Jeff_Hicks@beaverton.k12.or.us
Linda Degman Linda_Degman@beaverton.k12.or.us
UPDATE ON MUSIC ALLOCATIONS
Total loss is now estimated at -17.55 positions
|
Hisae
|
Hougardy-Sato
|
Aloha Huber-Park
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Kai
|
Wang
|
Aloha Huber-Park
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Craig
|
Carney
|
Barnes
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
John
|
DeMarco
|
Beaver Acres
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Carolyn
|
Ritacco
|
Bethany
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Clare
|
Bourquein
|
Bonny Slope
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Julie
|
Michels
|
Cedar Mill
|
Elementary
|
0.50
|
0.50
|
0.00
|
|
|
Louise
|
Strait
|
Chehalem
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Jennifer
|
Mohr
|
Cooper Mountain
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Linda
|
Stephens
|
Elmonica
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Dan
|
Ehrenfreund
|
Errol Hassell
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Tamara
|
Enghusen
|
Findley
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
William
|
James
|
Fir Grove
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Lisa
|
Donner
|
Greenway
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Fran
|
Maynard
|
Hazeldale
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Lesley
|
Lindell
|
Hiteon
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Denise
|
Phillips
|
Jacob Wismer
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
allocation could go down if numbers change
|
|
Tina
|
Bodnar (Bodnarream)
|
Kinnaman
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Carol
|
Droz
|
McKay
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
David
|
DeBusk
|
McKinley
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Krasi
|
Nikolov
|
Montclair
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Vicki
|
Henry
|
Nancy Ryles
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Janos
|
Nagy
|
Oak Hills
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Glen
|
Libonati
|
Raleigh Hills
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Jennifer
|
Potter
|
Raleigh Park
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Juli
|
Mothon
|
Ridgewood
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Jodi
|
Pickett
|
Rock Creek
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Judith
|
Nielsen
|
Scholls Heights
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Joel
|
Parker
|
Sexton Mountain
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Jascha (Dax)
|
Smith
|
Springville
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Patty
|
Delph
|
Terra Linda
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Jennifer
|
Singleton (formerly Van Dyke)
|
Vose
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Marilyn
|
Welch
|
West TV
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Stan
|
Davis
|
William Walker
|
Elementary
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Doug
|
Bundy
|
?
|
Elementary Tech
|
||||
|
Patrick
|
Refsnider
|
Aloha Band
|
High
|
1.00
|
0.60
|
-0.40
|
|
|
Stanford
|
Scriven
|
Aloha Choir
|
High
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
-0.20
|
|
|
Rick
|
Delph
|
Beaverton Band
|
High
|
1.00
|
0.60
|
-0.40
|
2011-12 allocation Beaverton Band 0.8 / Whitford Band 0.2
|
|
Bruce
|
Brownell
|
Beaverton Choir
|
High
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
Beaverton Choir 0.8 / Whitford Choir 0.2
|
|
Jeremy
|
Zander
|
Southridge Band
|
High
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Daniel
|
Velasquez
|
Southridge Band – Guitar
|
High
|
?
|
?
|
?
|
|
|
Robert
|
Hawthorne
|
Southridge Choir
|
High
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
-0.20
|
|
|
Greg
|
Hall
|
Sunset Band
|
High
|
0.80
|
0.60
|
-0.20
|
2011-12 allocation Sunset Band 0.8 (0.6 band / 0.2 IB theory) / Meadow Park Band 0.2?
|
|
Chris
|
Rust
|
Sunset Choir
|
High
|
1.00
|
0.80
|
-0.20
|
2011-12 allocation 1.0 Chris Rust 0.5 Larry Coates
|
|
Matt
|
Sadowski
|
Westview Band
|
High
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Marci
|
Taylor
|
Westview Choir
|
High
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Raoul
|
Bellis-Squires
|
ACMA Choir
|
Middle
|
0.50
|
tba
|
0.00
|
|
|
Kelly
|
Archer
|
Cedar Park Band
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Andy
|
Isbell
|
Cedar Park Choir, PE
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Kelly
|
Dugger
|
Conestoga Band
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
0.5 band 0.5 music appreciation
|
|
Bridey
|
Monterossi
|
Conestoga Choir/Drama
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Thomas
|
Van Dyke
|
Five Oaks Band
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
2011-12 allocation 0.8 Choir 0.2 2012-13 allocation will be going to a grand total of .5 including band and choir
|
|
Mandy
|
Mullet
|
Highland Band
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Michael
|
Schlabach
|
Meadow Park Band
|
Middle
|
1.40
|
1.00
|
-0.50
|
2011-12 allocation 0.7 Band 0.3 Choir / additional 0.4 Band by Greg Hall
|
|
Larry
|
Coates
|
Mountain View Band
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
2011-12 allocation 0.5 MV Band / 0.5 Sunset choir
|
|
Andrea
|
Herinckx
|
Mountain View Choir
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Mary
|
Bengel
|
Whitford Band
|
Middle
|
0.80
|
0.75
|
0.05
|
|
|
Jennifer
|
Stenehjem
|
Stoller Band
|
Middle
|
1.00
|
0.50
|
-0.50
|
|
|
Conte
|
Bennett
|
ACMA (Jazz) Band
|
Middle/High
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
MaryAnn
|
Campbell
|
ACMA Orchestra
|
Middle/High
|
?
|
?
|
0.00
|
|
|
Walter
|
Bates
|
International School Band
|
Middle/High
|
1.00
|
1.00
|
0.00
|
|
|
Debra
|
Klatz
|
International School Choir
|
Middle/High
|
0.92
|
0.92
|
0.00
|
A Different Budget – By John Burns
The attached letter is from John Burns, music education advocate and BSD Budget Committee Chair. Please make this go VIRAL.
From: John Burns
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 1:31 PM
To: leeann_larsen@beaverton.k12.or.us; ‘Sarah Smith’; Tom Quillin; karen_cunningham@beaverton.k12.or.us; jeff_hicks@beaverton.k12.or.us; mary_vanderweele@beaverton.k12.or.us; Linda Degman (Linda_Degman@beaverton.k12.or.us)
Subject: A different Budget
Dear Board Members,
I know that tonight will be quite intense and decided to email you rather than take up time for public testimony.
The revised budget process and short calendar left us all asking good questions in the very last Committee meeting and I hope the Board has questions today. I know that many staff members feel that if the scope of the budget proposal had been revealed earlier, there would have been a significant outcry for more furlough days. We all believe that we do not have sufficient funding. Why would you schedule one more day than instructional hours requires? The tightest District schedule I have seen is 168 days for elementary students and 170 for MS & HS. That equates to 7 additional days that could be removed from BSD’s calendar and costs.
Another question remains regarding adding functions while such drastic cuts are being made. The new budget adds $5M in new staff positions. Does the Board agree with adding these at the expense of driving $5M additional cuts from classroom teachers?
I asked a question in the last Committee meeting that I hope you will take under consideration; and that is “what choices would you make if the numbers were different?” I think they would be different choices.
The Financial report shows that we will have expenses of $309.2M for 2011/12 (last year’s budget of $326 is a meaningless reference point)
The budget for 2012/13 is proposed at $302.5M . That is a deficit of only $6.7M. There are additional expenses of $5M for 2012/13 so the effective deficit for staff positions is a total of $ 11.7M – approximately 135 positions.
5 days is $6M. Forego the $5M in new positions and you have maintained our comprehensive curriculum in a way that is sustainable. Adding back 10 days is a simple and understandable appeal for a Local Option Levy.
Tonight is billed as the ‘Board’s opportunity to change the budget’. I hope you do respond tonight, but the budget is really a year around exercise and the Board can consider changes at any time. I hope you keep these options in your thinking as we finish this year and move forward to implement 2012/13.
Regards,
John G. Burns
Budget committee Chair
Beaverton School District music teacher trying to cut more days to save teacher jobs
Oregonian Article
Published: Friday, June 01, 2012, 6:11 PM
Southridge High School music teacher Robert Hawthorne is mounting a last ditch effort to get the Beaverton School District to slice more than five days from the calendar and use the savings to cut fewer teachers.
View full sizeWendy Owen / The OregonianAbout 500 people showed up at the Beaverton School District Budget Committee meeting on May 1 at Sunset High School to express their support for certain programs. Now, music teacher Robert Hawthorne is asking the district to cut more days to save more teachers
Hawthorne has created an online petition, asking the community to vote in support of cutting a total of 10 days next school year and nine in 2013-14. One day is the equivalent of about 16 teachers, including benefits.
Hawthorne said he plans to ask the school board Monday night to work with the teacher’s union to eliminate the additional days.
The board is planning to adopt the budget Monday, which calls for 344 reduced positions, five fewer days and increased class sizes, among a list of other reductions, to reach a bottom line of $302 million in operating funds — a $37 million shortfall.
District and union leaders this week said eliminating more days is a long-shot at this point because the negotiation process takes weeks, and nothing has been presented to either side, yet. The board has to adopt the budget by June 30.
Hawthorne appears to have the public’s backing. As of Friday at 6 p.m. he had 1,029 signatures with a goal of 2,000.
In addition, a school district community online survey of 3,800 people earlier this school year showed saving teachers and keeping class sizes manageable as top priorities. Keeping a full calendar was a low priority.
“We believe it’s more important to save teachers and allow for class sizes to be smaller,” Hawthorne said.
Anecdotally, Hawthorne said he has heard teachers say they want to cut more days to save jobs.
But, he’s battling an already negotiated contract between the district and teachers that calls for five unpaid days next year and four days in 2013-14. In addition, 95 percent of the teachers, who voted on the contract, said ‘yes.’
“I don’t think we have that many selfish teachers,” Hawthorne said.
Hawthorne said teachers weren’t given other options when they voted.
It was ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to five days.
He said he believes teachers thought a ‘no’ vote would have resulted in no days cut from the calendar and even more jobs lost.
Hawthorne voted ‘no.’
“I think an opportunity was hugely missed by our union,” he said.
Information given to teachers noted that there would be no further days cut or salary concessions beyond the ones they agreed to on the contract.
Asked if teachers understood that a ‘no’ vote would have restarted the negotiation process, Beaverton Education Association President David Wilkinson said, “I believe the members were well-informed when they voted.”
Neither Wilkinson nor board member contacted by The Oregonian supported rehashing the contract to add more furlough days.
“I don’t think it’s fair to second-guess the contract that was made and ratified,” he said.
Board member Sarah Smith, who pushed for cutting days over staff, said it’s time to move on.
“I feel we need to move forward with what we have,” she said, and noted that it would be the responsibility of the union to ask for the additional days.
Board member Karen Cunningham helped negotiate the teacher’s contract and said a lot of options were discussed, but the only formal offer to the union was for five days. She speculated that an offer of 10 days would have been rejected by union representatives.
“I think it would have been difficult for them to accept that without other financial concessions because it would be a pretty substantial cut in pay,” Cunningham said. “A little more than 5 percent.”
Cunningham and board member Jeff Hicks also said slicing days is not sustainable.
“We have no guarantee what we’re going to get from the state next year,” Cunningham said.
Meanwhile, Hawthorne, who has taught in the district for nine years, is watching pieces of the Southridge music program fade away. His job will no longer be full-time. Classes with lower enrollment such as jazz band, 21 students; percussion ensemble, 12 kids, and AP music theory, 15, were the first to go.
Elementary and middle school music programs will be reduced as well. The strings program was cut a few years ago in the district and band isn’t offered until middle school.
“What we’re doing is bad for students. It’s bad for the community,” Hawthorne said.
Wendy Owen
Follow @wowen1
© 2012 OregonLive.com. All rights reserved.
Talking Points
TALKING POINTS
Instructions
Write a polite, professional, high-character letter advocating for K-12 music programs in Beaverton and send it to these people by 10am Friday, June 1st:
Superintendent of Beaverton Schools
Dr. Jeff Rose Jeff_Rose@beaverton.k12.or.us
School Board Members
Karen Cunningham Karen_Cunningham@beaverton.k12.or.us
Tom Quillin Tom_Quillin@beaverton.k12.or.us
Mary Vanderweele Mary_VanderWeele@beaverton.k12.or.us
Sarah Smith Sarah_Smith@beaverton.k12.or.us
LeeAnn Larsen LeeAnn_Larsen@beaverton.k12.or.us
Jeff Hicks Jeff_Hicks@beaverton.k12.or.us
Linda Degman Linda_Degman@beaverton.k12.or.us
Budget Committee Members
Susan Greenberg susangreenberg@comcast.net
Dave Bouchard debouchard@comcast.net
Carrie Anderson canderson.ie92@gtalumni.org
Carmin Ruiz cruiz@beavertonoregon.gov
John Burns jburns@trustlightpoint.com
Gerardo Ochoa gochoa@linfield.edu
Cameron Irtifa cmirtifa@gmail.com
You may also wish to use the same talking points in a clear, concise two-minute speech to deliver to the school board at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, June 4, 2012, District Administration Center, 16550 SW Merlo Rd.
Our Strategy
We are not asking for a compromise or partial reinstatement. We are demanding that music be staffed at 100% of its current level. That means full-time music specialists at each elementary school, and middle and high school choral and instrumental programs retained at current level. WE NEED MORE MUSIC IN OUR SCHOOLS, NOT LESS. The recommended national minimum is 90 minutes a week K-12. Currently we are only averaging 60 min. per week at the elementary level.
Although other specialized programs in the district have been partially or fully eliminated, we need to be clear about our position to support and advocate for music. Avoid confusing the issue by bringing in PE, Library etc.
Our Slogan “Music Makes a Difference”
This should be in the subject line of every e-mail message and in the conclusion — preferably the last sentence— of any speech or letter you write. (The music advocacy audience has decided to echo this line each time it is delivered in a speech by one of our members on June 4th.) You may wish to include a few additional words to vary the subject line of your e-mails to avoid having them interpreted as spam and deleted by junk-mail filters.
Overview
The Issue
The Beaverton School District is cutting $37M from the 2012-13 school year budget, which will reduce the music programs to critical levels.
Staff Impact
• Reduction of music teachers: 19 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions will be eliminated.
• Remaining staff could be inappropriately placed in positions; i.e. a general elementary music teacher could suddenly be faced with maintaining a high school band or choral program. That individual may have seniority with no experience or desire for the new position. Moving teachers around like this is against best-practices. Learning is maximized by having the right teacher in the right position.
• Most positions (including high schools) will be reduced to half time.
Program Impact – Short Term
• Inexperienced overworked instructors placed in new positions.
• Instruction in combined classes that will not allow for growth and maximum potential.
• Most instructors will be required to teach at more than one school – focused attention, after school help/practice, and competitive programs will all be affected.
• Teacher turnover in music impacts the participation of current students who become uncertain and potentially drop the program reducing classes even further.
Program Impact – Long Term
• Reduction of elementary music has been shown to lead to reduced participation at the middle school level, which will eventually lead to the reduction/elimination of participation at the high school level.
• The caliber of music education will significantly if not completely eliminate the ability for students to continue on a career path in the arts. These reductions will not allow students to be adequately prepared to enter competitive universities.
• Student uncertainty can be life-altering. Students who drop the program can not easily rejoin once the situation stabilizes.
• Reducing music programs isn’t cutting them; it is a path to eliminating them.
Resolution
• The BSD cuts to the music program total just over $1M. One additional Budget Reduction Day (aka Unpaid Furlough Day) would save the BSD $1M.
• The BSD needs to preserve current funding for music programs.
Arguments and Talking Points
Music is not an “extra,” it is an essential.
Music is core curriculum K-12. It covers Fine Arts standards mandated by the State of Oregon. It should be taught by a full-time specialist at each elementary school, with a full-time instrumental specialist and a full-time choral specialist at each middle and high school. Music is not an extra-curricular endeavor; it is a discipline, a craft and vital to our society as a whole. Music is an important part of achieving our District Goal (2010-2015): All students will show continuous progress toward their personal learning goals, developed in collaboration with teachers and parents, and will be prepared for post-secondary education and career success.
Return on Investment
Studies show that there is a tremendous return on investment when a music program is fully articulated K-12. Students having consistent access and participation at an adequate level is what leads to the value of having music in our schools. Elementary programs provide the foundation to prepare students to access middle and high school programs. Additionally, the benefits of imagination, communication, confidence learned in elementary music follow a child even if (s)he does not continue into a middle or high school music program. We must support full-funding for music programs at all levels K-12.
Relative to cuts in athletics and the general teaching population, cuts to music are disproportionately high.
• 30% of music teaching positions will be eliminated (19.0 out of 60.0 FTE).
• 19 music teachers will be laid off with a few being reassigned to a general classroom if they happen to have that additional certification. That’s 14 from 34 elementary positions and 5 from 26 middle and high school positions.
• Of the 33 elementary schools, only 6 will retain a full-time music teacher at their school.
• 6 of 8 middle schools (not counting the options schools) are losing FTE. Only Cedar Park will remain intact.
• 4 of 5 high schools are losing FTE.
• Regarding athletics, only golf and water polo were cut.
One additional Budget Reduction Day (a.k.a. unpaid furlough day) could save all threatened music positions across the district.
• Each day cut saves the district $1.2 million
• Saving 19 music teachers would cost approximately $1.3 million
The cuts to music are not “sustainable.”
The district often talks of making “sustainable” budget cuts, that is, permanent cuts that do not have to be made again the next year. If cutting music is what the district considers to be “sustainable,” then are we to assume they plan to continue underfunding programs into the future? What is the plan to reinstate the programs? When and how?
We argue that cuts to our music program are not “sustainable,” but rather they are fatal to our programs. As we have seen in the past in other districts, cutting music to the levels proposed will not work. The high school programs will be dead within a few years.
Once programs are cut, they rarely return
Case in point: Music program cuts were made in the early 1990s due to Measure 5. Before those cuts, our district was home to an orchestra program that boasted 1700 fourth and fifth grade string students and 5000 elementary band students. All of the high school band programs were staffed with full-time directors who also had assistants. In addition to band and choir, there was a full 30-40 piece orchestra at each high school. Those programs were cut in 1993 and have never returned. Hardly anyone even remembers them anymore.
The proposed budget adds new programs and staff while cutting music programs and staff.
In order to cut costs on covering elementary teacher plan time, the district will institute two new “classes” that will be offered to every elementary student district-wide: media class and technology class. These 45-minute sessions (delivered on approximately half of the students’ school days) will be supervised by instructional assistants who do not have a teaching certificate (some may not even have a college education). No new material will be introduced by the instructional assistants during these sessions. They amount to a study hall in the library and a study hall in the computer lab. This proposal is akin to warehousing and babysitting students. The IA’s are less expensive to employ, and thus save the district money. While they are very nice people, they are essentially scabs for certified positions, and they are not providing education to students. Having students spend instructional time being supervised at school by non-teachers is in conflict with the District Goal (2010-2015): All students will show continuous progress toward their personal learning goals, developed in collaboration with teachers and parents, and will be prepared for post-secondary education and career success because it does not help prepare them for post-secondary education and career success. Only certified teachers can do that!
Music instruction will be extremely inequitable for students across the district.
All elementary students will have a 45-minute music class. However, some will get music once every 4 days, while others will get music every 5, 6 or 8 days. This plan is unacceptable.
Our community supports 10 Budget Reduction Days.
At meetings at every school during the month of February, the district collected information from parents and staff regarding how they would solve the budget crisis. Survey results published by the district showed parents and staff overwhelmingly supported the notion of cutting ten days from the school year in order to preserve programs and teachers. http://www.beaverton.k12.or.us/pdf/ci/ci_Budget%20Teaching%20Sessions%20Summary.pdf (page 12)
Arguments for using Budget Reduction Days to balance our school budget
• Budget reduction days are unpaid furlough days, meaning that teachers take a pay cut to help the school system running.
• Budget reduction days preserve the educational integrity of a school system retaining teachers and important school programs.
They reduce the chaotic “bumping” of school staff that happens after layoffs, helping schools stay efficient and connected to their parent community.
• Budget reduction days are easy to replace when funding for schools goes back up.
• Budget reduction days encourage the public to put pressure on the legislature to FIX THE WEAK TAXATION AND APPROPRIATION POLICIES THAT CREATED OUR BUDGET SHORTFALL IN THE FIRST PLACE.
• Budget reduction days mitigate or prevent increases in class size.
• Budget reduction days keep school staff employed, so that they continue to contribute to state tax revenues that fund schools.
• Budget reduction days make school cuts noticeable by the general public. They communicate the importance of funding schools properly in order to get the results we need.
The process of adding Budget Reduction Days (BRDs)
BRDs require negotiation with the Beaverton Education Association (teacher’s union). The BEA membership recently accepted a contract with the district that proposed only five BRDs for 2012-13 and four for 2013-14. Any additional BRDs would need to be negotiated and approved by the BEA. This requires the School Board to take action on June 4th by rejecting the current budget proposal and insisting that central administration pursue additional BRDs with the union. It is the school board’s duty to protect the school system. They have said that these cuts are terrible, so why haven’t they done everything they could to mitigate them? Adding five additional BRDs is an obvious choice. The community supports it, and so do most teachers.
The district is purchasing new laptops for every teacher?!
The district plans to spend nearly $450,000 in 2012-13 to purchase a new laptop computer for every classroom teacher. This expenditure had been deferred in the past to mitigate layoffs, but not this year. The laptops are not needed! This purchase can wait until funding levels improve. Use the savings to retain more teachers!
Music is Cultural Music is a unique means of transmitting our cultural heritage to succeeding generations. Music is a language that all people speak; it cuts across racial, cultural, social, educational and economic barriers, and enhances cultural appreciation and awareness. Through music students come to a better understanding of the nature of mankind as well as the diversities and similarities among cultures.
Music is Creative There are infinite ways in which children can express themselves in a music class. Creativity is an essential element of music-making, composition, improvisation and performance. In this technological age, music education provides students with opportunities to use their imagination and think outside the box whether they are working alone or in groups. Music education has changed from the model of 40 years ago. Today, children learn in multiple modalities singing, dancing, playing instruments, creating, composing, improvising, moving freely, dramatizing, listening and evaluating music.
Music is Key to Brain Development Music education profoundly affects brain development engaging all four parts of the brain and provides children opportunities to learn spatially, aurally, visually, kinesthetically, musically, interpersonally, intrapersonally, linguistically, and logically. Music has its own powerful language and symbol system which, when taught, requires students to analyze, compare, contrast, sequence, remember, and problem-solve. When children perform, they receive immediate feedback and opportunities for reflection. There is no doubt that the study of music improves academic achievement, enhances test scores, attitudes, social skills, critical and creative thinking.
Music is Life Skills Music promotes character development and leadership in students. Musical experiences can boost self-esteem, reinforce positive social behaviors, promote teamwork and discipline.
Music is Community Music teachers are essential leaders in school communities. They have contact with all children and their siblings. They often lead assemblies and host music programs which build a sense of community bringing families together to celebrate the arts, various traditions, and those experiences which build confidence and promote self-expression in children.
Music is Integral Music Education integrates math, language, geography, history, science, social studies, art and physical education. Some students may struggle with regular classroom subjects yet find the joy of success in music.
Music is Fun Music is the heart of the school, promoting school spirit. raising voices in song, and helping students to reach their potential through creativity and self-expression. Music enhances the quality of life integrating mind, body and spirit.