2015 PSD Board Election Questionnaire

As PSD has grown, we have seen school of choice has become limited at many sites. How do you preserve that choice in a climate that’s made it difficult to support it?

- We’ve heard from some parents the district doesn’t advertise the limited availability well enough; there’s not actually choice.

I sympathize with the people in our community who are finding it difficult to choice into a PSD school. This is the mostly driven by three factors, all of them signs of a healthy and thriving school system:

1. Quality schools2. A growing community3. A flexible system of choice that gives families options (30% of PSD families utilize the

choice system)

Ultimately I think it is important that we build additional schools in PSD to relieve some of the population pressure that is restricting choice today, but this is a long-term solution. To be honest I do not have any good ideas on how to resolve this problem in the short term, but I am absolutely not a proponent of simply saying “tough luck” and moving on as some in our community have suggested. I am in favor of listening to the community and working to come up with a solution. I am humble enough to know that I may not always have the right answer. Listening and humility, unusual characteristics in someone seeking public office. Perhaps we could use more of that.

I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to point out that this is exactly why it is so important that our school board reflect our community. Next year will be the first time that PSD’s school board will not have a single member with a child in school. So when an issue like this comes to the district and not one board member is a parent of a PSD student there will be a tremendous community backlash at the utter disenfranchisement of more than 60,000 direct stakeholders in our schools.

If you look at the chaos that has erupted next door in Thompson you will see what I’m talking about. The four member board majority was elected and not one of them had a child in TSD schools. That majority is completely disassociated from the schools they are charged with representing, and therein lies the source of the community’s distrust.

I have a 2nd and a 6th grader in PSD schools. They will be in PSD for many years to come. You know that I want to keep our schools for all PSD students great because I have a vested interest in them. I am the only candidate who can truly give the parents and students of PSD a voice.

The district has a long-term plan to deal with growth in the district. However, new schools are years away. How do you deal with that growth today? Modular units? Later start times?

Modular units and flexible scheduling are options that should be on the table. I also think the district needs to do a better job representing some of the great schools we have in the north and central areas of our community. There are quality teachers and desirable student ratios in other schools in PSD, and it shouldn’t be too difficult to develop programming that will help drive results and therefore populations to those schools.

The school district will soon put a bond to the general public to pay for construction of several new schools and needs at others existing. Does it go far enough? How will you sell the hundreds of millions of dollars to those who don’t have kids in the system?

I can’t imagine next year’s request going any farther. I think it is the right level of ambition, but I am very concerned with the district’s ability to pass it. The 2010 request passed by a slim margin and the environment in 2016 will be more challenging in my opinion. Larimer county residents will be facing sharply higher property tax bills, there will be higher voter turnout for a presidential election and the mechanism of TIF financing that is controversial to some will be in play. I think this sets the stage for a voter swing of more than a few points which would be enough to kill the request if 2010 is any indicator.

I am aware of the community facilities commission that is currently meeting to draw up the request, but that group is not tasked with understanding the strategic and political consequences of the request, nor should it be. It is paramount that PSD leadership take a role, gain support from all stakeholders (such as the Chamber of Commerce, a group they failed to convince in 2010), and clearly communicate the needs that the request will address.

It is critical that the PSD board have a finance professional from the community to pull this off. Without a representative who can thoroughly understand and clearly speak to the financial implications of the 2016 request I fear it does not stand a chance given all of the reasons I have stated.

What’s the top priority/goal for you as you consider taking a seat on PSD’s school board in the 4-year term to come?

There are systemic problems with our school financing mechanism in the State of Colorado, and there are significant concerns with PSD’s use of the limited funds we receive. My top priority is to bring the expertise of a finance professional to the board, a role that has been desperately needed for several years.

In the short time I have worked on the District’s Budget Advisory Committee I have been able to successfully collaborate with Executive Director of Finance Dave Montoya. As a board member I can be very, very effective working with Mr. Montoya, working with our State Legislators and helping our community navigate the occasionally complex and turbulent waters of public school financing in Colorado. This will help PSD use its funds optimally while assuring the public that its taxes are delivering the highest value with the utmost efficiency possible.

What does student success look like to you at the conclusion of a student’s senior year in high school?

That none of that student’s options are unavailable to him or her, and that they depart PSD with a head start on whatever path they may choose. Said another way, I want PSD graduates to be better equipped than their peers, to be curious lifelong learners and to instill in them the belief that anything is possible.

What can you do as a board member to evaluate – and improve on – the number and time spent on mandatory testing?

No PSD student should take another PARCC/CMAS test ever again. There is a need for standardized testing but PARCC is clearly not the answer. Of the original 26 states that adopted the PARCC consortium a few years ago, 19 have since abandoned the idea and cancelled the contract.But mine is far from a radical proposal. The largest school district in Colorado Springs has opted out of PARCC. PSD itself determined the federal minimum was the best option for its students, a significant reduction from the current testing load. Unfortunately our district was unwilling to go far enough.The worst part of the current testing regimen is that it hurts our high-risk, most vulnerable students the most. PSD simply cannot comply by its goal of educating every child, every day, if it insists on distracting them with unnecessary, burdensome tests that serve no purpose for students, teachers or schools. As of this writing the results of PARCC that our district took in April are still unavailable. That is the very definition of a waste of time and our students deserve better.The CSAP test was not this controversial. PSD should go right back to it, and not after yet another commission studies the idea.

What will you do to engage the significant block of the public that doesn’t have kids in school in this election?

I have been very successful in my discussions with these communities. Our elderly population, which is growing at more than twice the rate of our total population growth, finds itself especially susceptible to tax increases. Our business community wants to know that our schools are capable of producing the next generation of leaders in our community. Neither of these communities is feeling really comfortable with the current situation, and both of them are very concerned about the influence that politics is having on a non-partisan position.This is yet another reason why it is so important that our school board reflect the values of our community. If there is no finance representation, if there is no parental representation, if there is no representation from non-partisan, independent leaders, then we are inviting problems into our schools.

Should PSD work toward free all-day kindergarten for all?

No, at least not right now. For several reasons: The current system of optional all-day Kindergarten works. Not everyone wants to send

their 5 year old to Kindergarten all day and should not be forced to do so. This will put further pressure on some of our elementary schools that are already over

capacity. This will come at significant cost since given legal requirements for a Kindergarten room

and staffing requirements. I believe there are higher budget priorities for the time being.

I would never rule out the idea because I believe the evidence that shows us how much that investment pays off. I just have not heard compelling evidence to convince me it should be a top priority in PSD today.

Should PSD consider a year-round school calendar?No. We are not in the situation that communities like Castle Rock are facing that would necessitate such a drastic change. At least not yet.