With school closings, declining enrollment and financial struggles putting Mesa Unified School District at a crossroads, parents packed a meeting this week to hear from the four candidates running for two seats on the governing board.
Close to 90 people attended the first Mesa Parent Advocates for Quality Schools (MPAQS) meeting of the school year on Tuesday. The two incumbents and two newcomers seeking seats on the board in the Nov. 2 election presented brief statements and answered audience questions.
Based on September enrollment figures, the district saw a 2,400-student decline from last school year. Five years ago, the start of the 2005 school year, there were 74,000 students in the district. Today, there are 64,817.
In January the current board voted to close a junior high school and moved smaller programs to that campus to free up other buildings for lease or sale.
Audience questions revolved around issues of declining enrollment, teacher morale and the public vote to repeal First Things First (a state-funded early childhood program).
Newcomer Merrianne Geisdorf, an accountant, said she wants to see the district re-evaluate the federal funds it accepts because of the mandates tied to them.
"I think education needs to be a local thing and not a federal thing," she said. "We need to get the federal government out of our schools."
Mike Hughes, a 16-year veteran of the board, said he's ready to make the tough decisions as the district faces the possibility of closing more schools. Students are leaving the district as politics, economics and competition take them elsewhere, he said.
Combined with the financial cuts the district has made - salaries have been frozen for several years - teacher morale is at an "all time crisis."
"We have to find ways to increase our revenues," he said.
Michelle Udall, Mesa schools graduate and stay-at-home mom, spoke next. She said she is running to provide "a mother's voice" to the board. She would like to see the district expand popular programs that currently have waiting lists. She also believes "college-style lectures" should be offered for some classes at the high schools as a way to prepare the students for higher education and save money.
Board president Dave Lane, who is in his fourth year on the board, said his biggest concern is short-changing any students. He recognized the district's finances will continue to struggle "a couple more years," but wants to keep any further cuts from district programs.
The two veterans oppose Prop. 302, which would sweep funds collected by First Things First to the state's general fund. Their opponents agree with the measure, saying the efforts of that early childhood program are being duplicated.
The candidates all agreed that more could be done to market popular programs - such as Franklin schools, the academies and Montessori schools - to draw in students from charter schools.
Hughes and Lane said the district can continue to boost morale by including teachers in the conversations taking place about changes. Udall said the board does a good job of thanking teachers and should continue that effort. Geisdorf also noted that teachers need to feel appreciated.
azmesa posted at 11:30 pm on Thu, Oct 7, 2010.
"We have to find ways to increase our revenues," he said.
That guy needs to be voted off the board. How about CUTTING expenses. You have 15% less students, you should have less costs.
soricobob posted at 6:29 am on Fri, Oct 8, 2010.
Charter schools are the answer, but what is the question? Until the state figures out that charter schools are siphoning money from, not improving, public schools as they were originally touted, the state should level the playing field through funding, personnel requirements, and charter school applications.
1_lstephen posted at 7:23 am on Sat, Oct 9, 2010.
I asked this question long ago; yet, I was unable to find the answer. For Example: Should it cost $3,000 (less or more) per year, and to educate a student eligible to quit school in January. Where does the remainder of this money go? Shouldn't there be a rise in 'savings' at Mesa's Unified School District? How many dropouts are there per year, and at what savings to its District? Where and how is the remainder of these funds applied? According to the article, Mesa experiences above 10,000 less students since 2005. Where's the money? If the annual School Budget access for so many students and teachers that will occupy their schools annually, in addition, per say 100 students drop-out throughout the school year; then, in my understanding, there should be a surplus from the years past til now.