April Board Meeting Recap
Reminder: Independent parent group — not affiliated with or endorsed by FASD.
Lots of applause, not much goverance
TL;DR
The only notable governance action was the election of a new board member, Yena Collette. I’m grateful she is stepping up to help the school.
Finance shared an early FY26 preview: a conservative draft shows a modest shortfall, but leadership said the school is on solid footing and can manage through a more difficult budget year.
Current enrollment sits at 223. For next year, the school is planning around stronger numbers, especially in kindergarten, first grade, and fifth grade.
SAC presented on officers, bylaws, survey plans, and that some initial budget feedback was given to the interim school director.
Facilities: still no meaningful update.
Nothing was said about the long-discussed policy review / “audit-lite” work. That has quietly become a black hole.
Overall: another meeting with good information — but limited governance.
Parent Recap (What Happened)
The April board meeting opened with procedural votes and then moved into a “Gratitude + Success” segment. Board leadership thanked the PTO for the gala, thanked the hiring committee, and gave a shout-out to the school’s new scan-to-listen French books.
New board member: Yena Collette elected unanimously
The Board’s main piece of business was voting in Yena Collette as a new board member. Yena was introduced as a current parent, business owner, finance committee participant, and grant-writing helper. She was elected unanimously.
Thank you, Yena. It matters when capable parents raise their hands to help the school.
Finance: cautious forecast, reassuring tone
Finance previewed a multi-year forecast and the draft budget that will be brought for a vote next month. The Treasurer described an initial forecast showing a shortfall under conservative assumptions, while noting that state funding, enrollment, and other variables are still moving. Kathy said the school is on “solid footing” but described next year as likely to be one of the more difficult budget years and referred to “right sizing the organization.”
Current enrollment was reported at 223 (down from 224 last month), after some students joined and others moved away. For next year, the school is planning around stronger numbers — especially in kindergarten, first grade, and the addition of a fifth grade classroom.
Facilities: no new news
The facilities committee update was very short. The message was essentially the same as last month: they are still waiting on more concrete information and no private facility has been identified.
SAC update
SAC reported that it has voted on officers, is working through bylaws for a May board vote, and is reviewing survey plans in light of DPS not running its usual parent/student survey this year. The SAC chair also said SAC had given Kathy some initial budget priority thoughts.
School director report
Kathy’s report covered enrollment, CMAS participation, student projects, staffing, STEM purchases, and end-of-year events. Verna highlighted several student-led initiatives, including crossing-safety concerns, AI-related student advocacy, and the Fun Run.
The Board also heard from three students during a “Student Leader in the Spotlight” segment.
On staffing, Kathy said the French side is fully staffed for next year, though it’s unclear how many teachers are local vs. visiting teachers from France. One additional English-side role is being added. Visa-related hiring is ahead of schedule compared with last year.
Scheduling
The Board discussed strategic planning sessions in late May and early June, though there was visible confusion and calendar conflict during the discussion. A possible May 11 meeting was also mentioned and left unresolved.
Public comment
No public comments were received.
The “Since You’re Here…” Section
Unofficial reflections — offered in good faith (and with a grain of salt)
I want to be explicit: the section above is my attempt to keep things factual and balanced. This section is my personal perspective.
This was another meeting that felt more like a read-out and pep rally than a place for substantive governance.
The student stories were heartfelt. The puppy cameo was memorable. None of that is the problem. The problem is what gets displaced. These meetings are supposed to be working meetings for governance and oversight, but the public portion continues to feel like a mix of applause, updates, and affirmation rather than a space where the Board does visible, substantive work.
It is odd that some board members had not met Yena
This is not about Yena. I know Yena. She is kind, capable, and generous with her time. I’m glad she is helping the school.
But it was striking that some board members seemed to be meeting her in real time during the vote. That is not a great look. A board does not need every member to run a full independent search, but you would hope every voting member has had enough direct exposure to a candidate to cast an informed vote.
Instead, the process felt less like deliberation and more like ratification.
The financial picture is a mixed bag
There are real positives here. The school appears to have reserves. The projected shortfall is not catastrophic. The Finance Committee is using conservative assumptions in some areas.
But there are also real questions.
Current enrollment is 223, well below the 240 figure the school projected last year. The school now projects stronger enrollment next year, especially in the early grades, even though I’ve heard from some parents who are moving on. Maybe there is backfill. Maybe the school is seeing stronger interest than some of us realize. But it is still a question worth asking.
Kathy said next year will be difficult and used the phrase “right size the organization.” No one asked what that means. No one pressed on what belt-tightening might look like if revenue comes in soft. Nothing meaningful was said about fundraising pressure. And no one walked families through the tradeoffs in a public way.
There is also an interesting budget wrinkle here. It appears possible that consulting spend is now being allocated more appropriately rather than partially living inside the MLO 2020 bucket. If that is true, consultant spending may look higher on paper while actual consultant dependence is going down. That would be a more honest presentation. But it also makes the budget harder to read without a real public explanation.
What bothers me most is process. It is hard to believe the Board is going to ask the meaningful questions this budget deserves and approve it in the same May meeting. What a missed opportunity.
The policy review has now become a black hole
Another thing that stood out: nothing was said about the policy review / “audit-lite” work that had previously been floated as an important governance task.
Maybe that work is still happening quietly in the background. Maybe it has stalled. Maybe it has been overtaken by other priorities. But from the public’s perspective, it has simply disappeared.
That is not a small thing. If the Board is serious about governance, policy review is exactly the sort of unglamorous, necessary work it should be doing. Instead, like several other important topics, it seems to have slipped into the category of things that are discussed somewhere else, sometime else, and never really surfaced in public.
It was good that SAC presented, but it was still a read-out
It was genuinely good to see SAC on the agenda. That is better than silence. But what we got was a read-out, not advice. We heard about officers, bylaws, surveys, and vague budget input. We did not hear clear recommendations to the Board.
If SAC is going to matter, it cannot just be a group that “did stuff.” It has to actually advise. I really hope that changes.
The student stories were lovely — which is why this felt like the wrong venue
The student spotlight portion was warm and memorable. Hearing students talk about using French, helping classmates, leading in soccer, caring for siblings, and dreaming about the future was a wonderful reminder of the school’s purpose.
But there were only about ten or so community members on the call, and the strong majority appeared to be teachers or staff. So why are we sharing some of the school’s most mission-centered stories in such a low-attendance setting?
Those stories should be amplified in the weekly newsletter, the podcasts, or other spaces where families will actually see them. They deserve a bigger audience than a sparsely attended Board Zoom. And they do not fit cleanly with the idea that this is the Board’s working meeting.
What to watch in May
Whether the Board actually pressure-tests the FY26 budget before approving it.
Whether “right sizing the organization” turns into concrete staffing or program changes.
Whether SAC bylaws preserve a meaningful advisory role.
Whether facilities remains stuck in vague-update mode.
Whether the policy review ever resurfaces.
Whether the Board meeting continues to function mainly as a public wrap-up of work done elsewhere.
~ Greg
P.S.
During the discussion of CMAS testing, it was brought up that FASD had received recognition for our test scores. The award is real, and congratulations are fair. But the state page shows FASD as a 2024 recipient — meaning this recognition is tied to 2024 performance data, awarded in 2025, and not some new 2026 development.
You can decide for yourself whether that is a meaningful update or just a nicely timed recycling of old good news.
