August Board Meeting Recap
Reminder: Independent parent group — not affiliated with or endorsed by FASD.
New Board leadership, enrollment above budget, reserve spending, and a tabled policy change.
TL;DR
The Board elected Wendell as incoming Chair and Yena as incoming Secretary. Both transitions are expected in September.
Enrollment was 252 students, compared with 240 in the FY27 budget. School leadership expects the October count to settle closer to 245.
The Board approved a supplemental FY26 budget authorizing $194,207 from beginning fund balance. Draft actuals showed a $174,256 shortfall, but the meeting did not itemize the move and former-site exit costs.
The Board tabled a proposal to raise the School Director’s single-purchase limit from $3,000 toward $10,000, asking for transaction examples and peer-school comparisons first.
The newly released CMAS results were not discussed because the assessment snapshot had been omitted from the presentation. The School Director said the update would return at the next meeting.
A strategic-planning session was tentatively set for September 11 at 2:30 p.m. No process for family, staff, or SAC input was discussed. The Facilities Committee will continue for at least six months, but the Board did not describe its remaining scope.
Parent Recap (What Happened)
The June Board meeting included the School Director’s year-end report, committee updates, votes on SAC and PTO bylaws, Board recruitment, PTO introductions, and a brief strategic planning update.
New officers will take over in September
The Board elected Wendell to succeed Interim Chair Kiana and Yena to succeed Secretary Yana. The outgoing officers will begin transferring responsibilities before the September meeting. Yana’s longer-term Board status was described as still to be determined.
Enrollment opened above budget
School leadership reported 252 students at the start of the year. That is above the 240 used for the FY27 budget, although enrollment will continue to move before the October count. Leadership expects the final number to land around 245.
A Board member asked when classrooms have a second adult providing instructional support. School leadership said Kindergarten has a full-day TA; first-grade TAs support key French blocks and lunch and recess; second grade and above use pull-out and push-in support rather than dedicated classroom TAs.
The Board authorized FY26 reserve spending
The FY26 final-budget column showed a $194,207 deficit, while draft actuals showed a $174,256 shortfall. The resolution authorized use of up to $194,207 from beginning fund balance. The Treasurer explained that the resolution’s appropriation schedule includes TABOR and other nonspendable reserves to comply with statutory requirements; that accounting presentation is not an itemized account of what FASD spent.
School leadership attributed the shortfall to enrollment below budget, maintenance at the former school, moving costs, modular removal, and repairs needed when leaving. The resolution characterized the reserve use as one-time spending, but the presentation did not assign amounts to those categories or address the status of FASD’s security deposit with the Archdiocese.
Members paused a spending-authority change
The current threshold for a purchase without a second Board signature is $3,000; the proposal discussed was approximately $10,000. Members agreed that the process may create unnecessary work but would not choose a new number without evidence. The Finance Committee will review actual transactions, comparable-school practices, and expenses that should already bypass a second signature.
Other actions and updates
The Board approved updated Family and Staff Handbooks, subject to correction of minor administrative errors.
The Facilities Committee will continue for at least six months, and possibly the full school year, while the Board decides whether its remaining work justifies keeping it active.
The Board tentatively scheduled a multi-hour strategic-planning session for September 11 at 2:30 p.m. and asked members to submit topics.
The PTO previewed its community-building and fundraising plans, including moving the Fun Run to the fall.
No one signed up for public comment.
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.
Asking before voting was the best news of the night
The administration identified a real operational bottleneck. Board members asked why $10,000 was the right answer, what peer schools do, which purchases are causing delays, and whether the existing policy is being applied correctly.
Then they paused the vote and asked the Finance Committee to return with evidence.
That is simply good governance: understand the problem, test the proposed solution, and decide after the tradeoffs are clear. More of that, please.
New leadership is another reason to pay attention
Too many past Board meetings have felt more like celebratory readouts than public governance. This meeting included actual questioning, disagreement, and a decision to wait for better information.
Wendell’s transition into the Chair role does not guarantee that this will continue, but it creates an opportunity for the Board to establish different norms. This may be a good time for families who tuned out to tune back in. If meetings include real discussion and visible oversight, parents have a reason to pay attention—and participate.
The academic follow-up needs better preparation
The School Director said the promised assessment snapshot had been omitted from the presentation, and no Board member asked about the newly released results. Parents can explore the grade- and subject-level data in the FASDads CMAS Explorer.
I may be more sensitive than most because my day job involves preparing presentations for executive audiences. Still, this was not the first meeting where Board materials arrived incomplete or loosely assembled. Board presentations are how the administration equips volunteer directors to govern. Missing core content wastes limited meeting time, weakens oversight, and does not match a school whose vision is to be a “premier bilingual educational institution.”
The scores themselves are a signal to investigate, not a diagnosis. September should bring a quality-controlled analysis of the trends, likely causes, and recommended response from the School Director and SAC.
The financial follow-up should be simple and public
Using reserves for a one-time school move can be reasonable. The remaining question is what the money actually purchased.
The $194,207 final-budget authorization and $174,256 draft-actual shortfall are different accounting snapshots. I am less concerned about reconciling those two figures than I am about seeing the underlying spending. How much went to the physical move, modular removal, parking-lot and playground restoration, deferred maintenance, and other lease-exit work? And did FASD recover its St. Ignatius security deposit from the Archdiocese, have it applied against repairs, or lose some or all of it? The meeting did not answer those questions.
The Treasurer also said monthly reports are posted on the school website. As of August 27, the public Financial Transparency page listed annual budgets, audits, and tax filings, but I could not locate monthly reports. If they are posted elsewhere, send me the link and I will add it. If not, publishing them is an easy transparency win.
The MLO 2020 question also remains unresolved. FASD’s budgets allocated $84,838 in FY26 and $86,976 in FY27 to consultant services under object code 0334, but the Board has not publicly explained what those services purchased or whether the use was reviewed with DPS. That question has been open since March.
A strategy date still needs a participation plan
Putting time on the calendar is progress, but the meeting did not discuss how teachers, families, or the SAC will inform priorities. The Board should explain the input process before September 11.
What to watch next
SAC bylaws and parent elections: The Board-approved bylaws require two parent representatives to be elected by the parent community within 60 days after the first day of school. Will the Board ensure those elections occur and confirm that DPS received the required notice of the bylaw and Board-composition changes? See the August SAC recap for background.
Academics: Does the Board receive a quality-controlled assessment analysis, and do the School Director and SAC explain the causes they see and the actions they recommend?
Leadership transition: Does the more substantive engagement seen in the spending discussion continue under Wendell? This may be a good time for parents who tuned out during passive readouts to tune back in.
Finance: Does the school publish an itemized account of the move and lease-exit spending—including what happened to the St. Ignatius security deposit—link the monthly reports directly, and explain the MLO 2020 consulting allocations?
Facilities: Now that FASD is operating at Harrington, will the Board define the Facilities Committee’s remaining charge and endpoint and publish the final transition costs and lease-closeout status?
Spending authority: What actual transactions, peer-school comparisons, and policy fixes support the next proposed threshold?
Strategy: Does planning begin with mission and academics, and how will staff, families, and the SAC contribute before priorities are set?
The August meeting did not resolve those questions. It did offer one encouraging sign: Board members respectfully challenged a proposal and waited for better information before acting.
That is a green shoot worth watching.
~ Greg
