School budget votes across New York will take place one week from today. Take our poll to let us know what you’ll be doing next Tuesday!
With school budget votes right around the corner, you may be finding yourself checking your local district’s website to find out more about tax information for the coming year.
Although often referred to as a “2 percent tax cap,” New York’s tax levy “cap” law does not restrict any proposed tax levy increase to 2 percent. Pursuant to the law, each school district must follow an 8-step calculation to calculate its individual “tax levy limit.” That limit then determines what level of voter support is required for budget approval. Essentially, the “tax levy limit” sets a threshold that, if exceeded, requires districts to obtain a higher level of community support to pass a proposed budget.
Still confused? Hit the Play button below.
This Point of View was submitted by Michelle Adalian, a fourth grade teacher at Schalmont Central School District.
When I was a child, I loved to line my bed with every stuffed animal and doll I owned. I read books, sang songs, wrote stories, had calendar time, and modeled math. Because of the wonder and joy of learning I encountered in my first public education experience in Kindergarten, I knew at the age of five that teaching was what I wanted to do when I grew up. My kindergarten teacher, Mrs. Smith, made learning fun and inviting. I never questioned my early decision to be just like her and I anxiously waited for the day I would have my very own classroom.
Years later when I walked into my own classroom I came to understand that every fall represents a new beginning. Every year is a chance for teachers to make an unforgettable first impression, create an inviting environment, set up routines, and establish reward systems. Most importantly, we prepare our hearts to grow to include each new face that will call our classroom home five days a week for the next 10 months.
My first year of teaching was hard work but rewarding. I was happy to come early and stay late to prep and plan, collaborate and create. The students’ excitement fueled my excitement. My fourth graders were filled with curiosity, a natural thirst for knowledge, and willingness to grow. We conducted experiments. We formed literature circles and looked in depth at literature. We wrote for a purpose. We “adopted” a soldier who was serving in Afghanistan and sent numerous letters and care packages to his unit. We used manipulatives to solve math problems and worked together to resolve real-life conflicts. We developed social skills and practiced compassion. We celebrated our successes and our hiccups along the way. We found that making mistakes lead to new discoveries. We went outside to run, play, or enjoy the fresh air. We’d come back refreshed, ready to work hard.
Fourteen years later, I am lucky enough to be able to work with a tremendously dedicated faculty and administration that is focused on meeting the needs of each individual student. We plan lessons together, bounce ideas off of one another, and rely on our administration for advice and guidance. Still, it rarely feels like enough. My 4th grade class of 2015 has a different feel than my class of 2001. There aren’t many spur of the moment discoveries or quick games of tag. It feels as if time has been sucked away and it is implied that every second spent in the classroom should focus on “increasing rigor” and preparing for the test. Many kids are stressed, worried, anxious, and nervous. These children are stressed. They ask about the test. When is the test? What will be on the test? What if I fail the test? They get stomachaches and headaches. They put their heads down. They cry. They shut down.
These tests that are becoming the end-all-be-all of student and teacher assessment are killing the teaching profession. They’re squashing creativity. These tests are not informing our instruction as proper assessments should. They tell us nothing of our students or our ability to teach. Please, look at a portfolio of work we’ve completed. Observe students engaged in an activity. Watch the “light bulb” click for a student who’s been working his tail off! But, to be judged solely based off of a test score, especially a test score taken from an assessment requiring students to comprehend material well above their level is unfair. Why is this considered valid?
I hate to drop a bomb, but here’s a little secret: some kids in New York state or around the nation for that matter, don’t care about the test. Why? Because she was taken by Child Protective Services and had the most frightening night of her life. Because his parents are alcoholics. Because her mom leaves when things get hard. Because he lives in a shelter. Because his mother has cancer. Because he is abused. Because she is used as a pawn in a nasty divorce. Because his father is incarcerated. Because, because, because….
Maybe many of those “becauses” seem to apply to a limited number of students, but children are affected by so many events that we, as adults may think are insignificant. In reality, these small moments impact a student’s ability to focus and their ability to try their best, even on a “test day.” A child may not perform well because he missed the bus, because she got into an argument with her sister, because her best friend sat on the bus with someone else, because there is a new baby at home that gets all the attention, because his grandmother is ill, because he is thinking about the next level of his video game, because she overslept. Because, because, because… After months of teaching and learning, it is an injustice to be represented as a number. To be labeled as a 4, 3, 2, or 1 based off of a single assessment is a tiny and unfair piece of a very large puzzle.
I encourage “the powers that be” to walk just an inch in our shoes. We do much more than what a bubble sheet might reveal. It doesn’t show the amount of hugs given to little ones who feel broken, the coats bought for children who wear nothing more than a thin shirt on a below-freezing day. It doesn’t properly depict the teacher who gives up her lunch to provide extra support. It will never show the tears shed and the sleepless nights wondering if one of your students is being abused. It doesn’t total the amount of money spent on snacks passed out to those who rarely have a meal waiting for them at home, or the toiletries given away so hygiene can be properly tended to. I could go on… and on…we all could.
We are not a “special interest group” as Governor Cuomo likes to paint us. We are public servants who proudly perform our jobs each day. We are educators trying our best to lead the next generation to make this world a better place. We need to be supported, not attacked. We need to be encouraged, not degraded. We are loving. Compassionate. Creative. Flexible. Innovative. We carry our students in our hearts long after we exit our school each day. Every child deserves to be tended to with grace, care, respect, patience, and love. Each student has a story that deserves to be heard. I fear for the educational future of my four daughters. My kindergartner enthusiastically announced that she wants to be a teacher when she grows up. I wonder, when she gathers her dolls to play school, will they be sitting in rows with a bubble sheet and pencil in hand?
We are not failing. In fact, we are quite the contrary. There is no such thing as failing when you serve in a school district. We do not allow ourselves to fail. We keep trying, we keep learning, we keep coming back for more. We learn new ways to reach students. We attend workshops, seminars, and conferences. We take advantage of professional development. We seek the advice of others, we serve on committees, we read the latest research, and we assess and analyze data. We have open lines of communication with parents. We are involved in the community. We spend early mornings and late nights preparing, grading, planning and thinking.
No, we are not failing. We are far from failing. We are giving it everything we’ve got and then some.
This Point of View was submitted by Jessica Melchior, a third grade teacher in the Schalmont Central School District.
Think of your child’s favorite teachers. Think of the teachers who made an impact in your life. Think of your friends, family and neighbors who are teachers. Many of these teachers could be standing in an unemployment line in a few years after they have been deemed “ineffective” or their school has been deemed “failing”.
This is a direct result of the so-called “reforms” attached to the 2015 New York State budget.
All of those law makers who listened to teachers, parents and administrators, and then turned their back on us with a “heavy heart” need to know that they passed a budget that was discriminatory at the core. They took an APPR system that had potential, scrapped it, and made it even worse for teachers and students. Teachers across the state are considering other employment options and asking: “Should we stay strong in our positions and take the inevitable hit of getting rated ‘developing’ or ‘ineffective’ after years of service, only to get fired in a few years and tossed out of the profession? Or, do we leave now with our heads high to seek employment outside of education?”
This leaves me with a burning question as a parent. When so many of the teachers are gone, when teaching becomes a revolving door, who will teach my children?
I’ve been on the side of reform. I’ve defended Common Core to my parents, colleagues, friends and family. I’ve said it has merit and I believed in its rigor. I stated before teachers, administrators, NYSUT leaders and legislators at the Educational Forum at South Colonie on February 26th, 2015; “I am not against Common Core. I am not against assessments. I am not against APPR.” I welcome rigorous curriculum, I rely on assessment data and I appreciate feedback from observations. But this? This isn’t what I believe in. This isn’t something I can stand up for. This means it is only a matter of time before I lose my job.
I could justify to you right now why I deserve to be a teacher. I could tell you that I’ve never received an “ineffective” score on an evaluation. I could tell you that I believe in authentic learning tasks, so each year when I teach fourth grade, I dress up in colonial clothing and host a revolutionary war debate. I could tell you I that I have been on the Curriculum Committee, chaired the School Facilitation Team, lead a major district-wide initiative to get kids and families reading, sat on the board of our local teacher’s center, served as grade level coordinator and facilitated workshops on Evidence Based Learning, use of Science Interactive Notebooks and project-based learning. I could tell you that I care deeply for the kids in my room each year and that I value their learning so much that I literally bring home a suitcase over weekends and breaks.
I could tell you why the governor’s plan is flawed too. It’s because the standardized tests used to judge my performance are not grade level assessments. They are created by Pearson, a for-profit company which also sells textbooks and student management software. I could tell you that the cut scores on these tests have actually changed to make it harder for kids to achieve a proficiency, making more teachers and schools seem like failures. I could tell you that the governor heard parents say that there was too much testing but ignored them. I could tell you that the approved tests do not mirror instruction, or that because I have a vested interest in the score, I cannot score my own students’ assessments. I could tell you that the governor knows this and is now making local schools the bad guy if they choose to use more than one assessment as APPR.
I could tell you that these tests make my kids cry. They make my kids anxious. They make my kids feel sick. They make my kids not want to come to school. Quite frankly, these tests and this system are an injustice to teachers, schools and most importantly, our children. They are not fair.
I could justify all of this to you. And then you would look up at me and think, “She’ll be safe. She’s one of the good ones.”
But you’d be wrong. I’m not safe.
My students struggle on these so-called grade-level assessments. My career as an educator is uncertain. And if I’m not in the classroom, my kids will be missing out. I was meant to be in that classroom. Because I see the good in every child in my room. Because I realize that their growth will come. Because I make learning fun. Because I know that kids are more than a number.
Just yesterday someone said to me in a condescending voice, “You won’t lose your job. The governor is just trying to get rid of a few bad apples.” I don’t know when apples became a symbol of education. I do know that there are a few rotten apples in a barrel if they’re left at the bottom without any sunlight, festering in warm temperatures. The governor’s plan doesn’t just toss out the rotten apples (which may have been made rotten by the conditions they were in); the governor’s plan tosses out all of the apples in the bottom half of the barrel. It is discriminatory to the core. It’s not good for the apples, it’s not good for the teachers, it’s not good for the students and it’s certainly not good for the people of New York state.
This Point of View was submitted by Glenn Niles, superintendent of the Arkport Central School District.
We in the Arkport Central School District understand parents have questions and concerns about the tests, which are scheduled to take place in April for students in grades 3-8. And while we understand some parents’ wish to have their children refuse to take the upcoming state assessments, we’re also concerned about the incomplete and, in some cases, inaccurate information about test refusal that is being promoted across social media channels and elsewhere — namely that the tests have no value, that they are overly punitive to teachers and that the information they provide is not used.
We urge parents to decide about their children’s participation in the upcoming exams only after thoughtful and informed consideration.
After 20 years working in New York public schools, I know first-hand the essential role that testing plays in the learning cycle; good teaching and learning depend on understanding what students know. But in the opt-out storm now raging around New York and across the nation, I fear the primary purpose — and ultimate value — of student assessment is being clouded by politics and the misdirected frustration of some well-meaning groups. Test refusal has become the latest political football in a game that ultimately sidelines local school districts and the students entrusted to their care.
I understand the impulse to rage against the machine. But the local school district is not the machine. For those who don’t know, school superintendents and Boards of Education have no say in the administration of standardized state tests to students in grades 3-8 in English language arts and math. The testing is a national mandate as part of the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2002. Furthermore, here in New York, all schools are required to have a 95 percent participation rate in state testing, as noted in a January 2013 memo to school districts from the New York Education Department (NYSED).
When the opt-out movement gained momentum last year and many districts’ participation dropped below the 95 percent mark, the state education department calculated the weighted average of the 2012-13 and 2013-14 participation rates for those schools. In Arkport, for example, the 2013-14 rate of 87 percent was offset by 2012-13’s rate of 96 percent. But that was a one-time fix. Last year’s rate will not help us this year.
For those that fail to reach this minimum threshold, consequences can include a loss of control over how federal Title I funds can be spent and/or the imposition of state intervention measures, such as the mandated preparation of new curricular and academic intervention plans; data analysis followed by strategic plans to address identified problems; implementation plans; mid-year plan reviews, final reports, etc. It goes on and on. I’ve done it all before, and it’s an enormous drain of time and other resources.
Specifically, if Arkport fails to reach a 95 percent participation rate in the state tests, we’ll likely have to re-do our District Comprehensive Education Plan (DCEP) and School Comprehensive Education Plan (SCEP), which will siphon away instruction time from teachers. We will also be required to participate in mandatory trainings in Albany; shift the focus of our professional development; and be required to set aside significant local, state and federal funds for “parent engagement.”
In short, we’ll lose a lot of local control and valuable time that would be better spent in the classroom with our students and teachers.
As important as it is for us to have the last word on how we spend the tax dollars set aside for the education of Arkport children, the real value in state testing is what it accomplishes in the teaching-learning relationship.
Standardized tests serve as an objective assessment of all students at a particular grade level and as a measuring stick of students’ understanding of the skills and knowledge embodied in the New York State Learning Standards. Without standardized testing, there is no way to compare students in one school or district with students in other schools and other locations, or against any objective measure of achievement.
All tests are meant to identify and help bridge the gaps that exist between what people know and what they should know in order to move to the next grade, be accepted in a college or vocational school, get a license, or earn a promotion at work. Schools use standardized test results to shine a light on skill and knowledge gaps — generally by grade level and specifically by student — so teachers can plan how best to fill them.
In addition, districts use state assessment results as one measure in determining what services or supports a student may need in school, such as academic intervention services in reading and math.
Some opposition to state testing stems from the state’s use of the test results in New York’s Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) ratings system used to evaluate teachers and principals. Currently, 20 percent of a teacher’s or a principal’s evaluation is derived from “student growth,” which can be based on state test results, depending on which grade level/subject they teach or oversee. “Growth scores” are based on how students perform on state exams compared to similar students across the state. Teachers are assigned growth scores based on demonstrated student growth as measured by these standardized assessments. Interestingly, and ultimately, it is not students’ individual achievement scores that matter for the purpose of teacher evaluations. It does not matter how many 1s , 2s, 3s or 4s any single teacher’s students achieve. What matters, and has always mattered, is whether or not a teacher’s students have demonstrated growth, from one year to the next.
Education law states that parents have the primary responsibility for their children’s education, and the decisions they make for their children should be respected. And I don’t dispute that. But as an educator, I understand the value in measurement and the penalties for non-compliance. At Arkport, each one of us is committed to ensuring our students are learning, growing and preparing as best they can during every one of the 182 instructional days in the school year. We accomplish this through a daily cycle of teaching, learning and assessing. We ask students to show us what they know every day, using a wide variety of assessment tools.
For us, the state exams are no more or less important than any other assessment we give our students at any time during the school year — all of which are used to help us support our students by planning appropriate instruction for them. If you sincerely wish to support teachers, consider providing them with all the tools they need to provide your children with all the services they need.
New York has a budget for 2015-16.
Shortly after 3:00 a.m. Wednesday morning, Assembly members concluded their lengthy session, officially finalizing the roughly $150 billion spending plan. Here’s a brief overview of the components of the education bill.
From Gov. Andrew Cuomo:
“Tonight, both houses of the Legislature have successfully passed the 2015-16 Budget spending plan to allow for the continued operation of government. This is a plan that keeps spending under two percent, reforms New York’s education bureaucracy, implements the nation’s strongest and most comprehensive disclosure laws for public officials and makes the largest investment in the Upstate economy in a generation.
This is a Budget that every New Yorker can be proud of, and I look forward to continuing to work to move New York forward this legislative session and beyond.”
Coverage from around the state
An outline of education reform proposals in budget (Capital New York)
Assembly affirms Cuomo-driven education budget, with ‘heavy hearts’ (Capital New York)
$142B New York state budget races clock (Capitol Confidential)
School aid funding will be tied to teacher evaluations after all, reports Capital New York. According to the report, the $1.4B increase in aid agreed upon in the budget will be tied directly to state approval of locally negotiated teacher evaluation plans. Districts will have until mid-November to have their plans approved.
From Capital New York:
According to budget language that has not yet been finalized, the department would craft—subject to approval of the Board of Regents—regulations outlining a new evaluation system by June 30, deputy senior education commissioner Ken Wagner told Capital on Monday.
Some aspects of the rating system would be optional, so they would require negotiations between school districts, teachers and principals’ unions.
This model of withholding aid until an evaluation plan is approved was first introduced by Gov. Cuomo in 2013. Now, it seems districts will have to renegotiate their APPR plans.
“If we rewind back to the first year of implementation, districts had to put these plans in place under threat of losing a state aid increase,” New York State School Boards Association spokesman David Albert told Capital New York. “Why would we do the same thing again? Why not give districts the time they need so they can take the time to negotiate agreements that make sense?”
Details began to emerge last night on the new teacher evaluation system. The system will have two components: student test results and observation. From Jessica Bakeman:
There will be two required observations, from a teacher’s principal or administrator and an “independent” evaluator, who could be a principal, administrator or “highly effective” teacher from another school or district. As Cuomo originally proposed, a college professor or retired educator could also serve as the independent evaluator. A peer observation will be optional…Student growth on state-administered, Common Core-aligned English and math exams in third through eighth grades and Regents exams in high school will be required components for the evaluation system…Districts and local unions may choose to include an additional test, which would be designated by the State Education Department.
According to the most recent budget information, the State Education Department will be tasked with determining the percentage of evaluations tied to test scores.
“We’re giving SED the ability to do what the intent is for them to do,” Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie said Sunday night. “The state education department should be the chief arbiters of education policy in the state, and we’re allowing them to do what their mission is.”
The bills containing school aid and teacher evaluation have not been introduced or finalized as of Tuesday morning.
On Monday, New York State United Teachers (NYSUT) president Karen Magee called for a mass opt out of state testing, citing that test-based evaluation is not a reliable measure of teacher effectiveness.
“I’m a parent,” Magee said. “My child is in 11th grade at this point in time. Had he been a third to eighth grader, he would not be taking the test. The tests are not valid indicators. The American Statistical Association has said there is no direct link to tie these tests to student performance or teacher evaluation. Let’s look at tests that are diagnostic in nature, that actually inform practice in the classroom, that actually work to serve students who are directly sitting in front of the teacher for the year as opposed to what we have in place right now.”
The “opt-out” movement has increasingly gained traction. According to the NYSSBA, during the 2014 testing cycle, approximately 60,000 New York students opted out of the tests, compared with 10,000 a year earlier.
NYSUT officials released a fact sheet on opting out Monday morning, though this shouldn’t come as a surprise as they have stated in the past that they support a parent’s right to opt his/her child out of the state exams.
Update 11:04 a.m. According to Assemblyman Anthony Brindisi on Capital Press Room, 50% or $550M of the Gap Elimination Reduction will be restored.
Update 8:56 a.m. School aid runs should be released today, according to NYSUT. (H/T Susan Arbetter @sarbetter)
School aid runs should be released today says NYSUT. @nysut
— Susan Arbetter (@sarbetter) March 30, 2015
Update 8:45 a.m. Gov. Cuomo and legislative leaders agreed on a framework for the state budget Sunday night that if approved, would see at least a $1.4B boost in aid to school districts and give the state education department control over teacher evaluation reform.
This increase in aid is higher than the $1.1B proposed by Cuomo in January. According to Capital New York, lawmakers said they were still working out exactly how school aid would be distributed. More details are expected to be released Monday.
The role of SED in relation to developing new teacher evaluations strays from what was reported late last week where lawmakers were reportedly discussing having the Board of Regents assume responsibility over evaluation reform.
From Capital New York on the role of SED handling evaluation reform:
A Cuomo administration source said the budget would specifically charge the education commissioner with the task, not the board. There is currently a vacancy in that role, since commissioner John King departed last year to take a job with the federal government…The department would have to flesh out the details of the new system by June. School districts would need to finalize any locally negotiated aspects of their ratings system and submit their plans for state approval by November.
“We’re giving SED the ability to do what the intent is for them to do,” Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie told Capital New York. “The state education department should be the chief arbiters of education policy in the state, and we’re allowing them to do what their mission is.”
The budget will reportedly also include a program for state takeover of under-performing schools. From Capital New York:
Under the agreement, struggling schools will submit a plan to the state education department showing how they will improve, according to a Cuomo administration source.
Pending approval, the schools that have been yielding poor outcomes for 10 years or more will be allowed one year to show “demonstrable progress” before being subject to a state takeover. If there is no “demonstrable progress,” the school will go into receivership. Schools that have been struggling for at least three years will have two years to improve.
“After decades of leading the nation in education spending but lagging in results, New York will set an example for all other states with a complete overhaul of the entrenched education bureaucracy,” Cuomo said in a statement. “These reforms – accompanied by an unprecedented financial investment – will put students first by bringing accountability to the classroom, recruiting and rewarding our best teachers, further reducing over-testing, and finally confronting our chronically failing schools.”
There are conflicting reports over the status of teacher tenure. While Cuomo’s original proposal called for five consecutive “effective” ratings, Heastie said tenure will change from three years experience to four and evaluations will play a part in the tenure decision.
According to Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, the Gap Elimination Adjustment, which so many education advocates have fought to have removed, will be dramatically reduced.
More details on the budget are expected to be released Monday.
With the state budget deadline of April 1 looming, New York State United Teachers (NYSUT) will be gathering at the Capitol on Thursday to protest Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s education reform proposals.
Since Cuomo released his budget proposal in late January calling for significant changes to the teacher evaluation process, NYSUT has been on the offensive, launching numerous ad and social media campaigns.
On Wednesday, NYSUT president Karen Magee said the union would support a stakeholders panel that would vet Cuomo’s proposed changes to the teacher evaluation system. The State Assembly majority conference is currently debating establishing such a panel.
From Capitol Confidential:
“We’d be in favor of a panel … of stakeholders,” Magee said, adding that the panel would have to have no power over aid or the authority to put any changes to the evaluation system into effect.
Cuomo’s proposed plan that would change the evaluation process for teachers so that 50 percent of scores are based on state exams and the other 50 percent on observations. Teachers would have to be rated highly effective or effective in both areas to receive an overall rating of highly effective or effective. A teacher who has two consecutive “ineffective” ratings would be removed from their teaching position.
NYSUT will also be protesting Cuomo’s withholding of state aid from schools until a budget deal is reached and high-stakes testing. Cuomo has tied $1.1 billion in education funding to the passage of his proposed reforms.
On Wednesday, Republican senators spoke out against Cuomo’s decision to withhold aid.
From the Buffalo News:
Sen. John J. Flanagan, R-East Northport, influential chairman of the Senate Education Committee, dismissed talk Wednesday that a decision on school aid will be delayed until June.
“I don’t envision any circumstance where we’d leave here without a school aid run and school aid numbers,” he said.
The NYSUT rally will be held at 4 p.m., Thursday on the “Million Dollar Staircase.”
This Point of View was submitted by Matthew J. Downey, president of the Bethlehem Central School District Board of Education, and Charmaine L. Wijeyesinghe, Ed.D., Vice President.
Now is the time of year when the New York State Legislature and Governor debate and formulate a state budget that includes funding for vital functions like our state’s public school system. This is also the time of year when Boards of Education in our State are formulating their district budgets for the 2015-16 school year. In Bethlehem, our budget development process is transparent, open and efficient, inviting community input. Like all school districts, our task involves evaluating state aid estimates, reviewing budget projections and determining the local tax levy necessary to support our educational program. This is a challenging task – with the provision of quality public education for the children of our community hanging in the balance. This year, the work of all school boards in New York State has been made even more difficult by the fact that we must put together our respective school district budgets without having the benefit of receiving key state aid figures that guide our budget development efforts.
The reason? This year, when the Executive Budget was proposed to the Legislature, it was instructed that state aid estimates be withheld from school districts, until policy changes proposed in the budget were enacted. Without aid runs, school districts are left guessing — about the amount of school aid that our school will receive, about what taxpayers might see on their tax bills in September, and about what a school district’s educational program might look like in the coming school year.
This withholding of state aid information comes on top of years of state budgets that eroded state education aid for all school districts – including Bethlehem. The loss of this state aid (through a mechanism called the Gap Elimination Adjustment, or GEA, and the freezing of state school aid through changes to Foundation Aid) caused upheaval for school budgets. In Bethlehem, the cuts caused an 18 percent reduction in teaching and administrative staff, the closure of an elementary school, the reconfiguration of bus transportation requiring students to walk longer distances, and other changes that resulted in fewer teachers and larger classes.
In the past six years, school districts statewide have lost nearly $9 billion in state aid. In Bethlehem alone, GEA losses have cost Bethlehem $18 million in state funding since 2010. This year, without the Legislature acting to get rid of the GEA, Bethlehem’s school funding will be cut by another $3 million.
In 2015, the state has a projected $5 billion surplus. With this positive budget environment, it’s time to stop the erosion of funding to our public schools by eliminating the GEA and the Foundation Aid cuts. On behalf of the thousands of school children in our school district, we ask our elected officials to stand up for public education and stand firmly in support of our public schools. Our students, parents, and community — as well as our educational program — depend on it.