February Board Meeting Recap
Reminder: Independent parent group — not affiliated with or endorsed by FASD.
TL;DR
A SchoolChoice glitch waitlisted all 21 fifth graders at DLS instead of auto-enrolling them. The Interim Director is "100% sure" it will be resolved — but root cause and timeline were not discussed.
Enrollment projections look strong — highest-ever Choice Round 1 numbers, with a projection of 245–250 for October count. But the school projected 240 this year and came in at 229, and nobody asked what's different this time.
Finances are tracking to budget-neutral, with a $17K tech bond windfall. The FY27 budget is being built "this spring" with no timeline provided — meanwhile, materials for next year are already being ordered.
The ED search closed with ~60 applicants narrowed to four finalists. Interviews start next week.
The Governance Committee is building a board calendar and conducting a policy inventory — overdue work, but welcome.
The PTO presented the evening's most substantive governance discussion. Fundraising is tracking 80–85% of last year; the gala needs ~$63K to match FY25.
Zero public comments were received.
Parent Recap (What Happened)
SchoolChoice: Fifth Graders Waitlisted at DLS
Every fifth grader who selected DLS was waitlisted instead of receiving automatic enrollment. The Interim Director acknowledged the error, said she's working with DPS SchoolChoice to resolve it, and communicated with families via ClassDojo. She assured the Board all 21 students will have seats — "I'm 100% sure it will be fine."
The Board did not ask about a timeline for resolution or what would prevent this from recurring. The Interim Board Chair's comment captured the mood: "After the collective swearing by the fifth grade parents was done, we're all okay?"
Enrollment: Highest Choice Round 1 Numbers Ever
FASD posted its highest-ever Choice Round 1 results, driven partly by adding a second fifth-grade section. The school will now have two classes at every grade level, K–5. The Interim Director projects 245–250 for October count against a district projection of 240.
One Board member noted that families who don't fill out SchoolChoice default to their current school — so the numbers include inertia, not just affirmative decisions. The intent-to-return form, which captures families leaving DPS entirely, has not gone out yet. The school projected 240 this year and came in at 229. That gap was not discussed.
STAMP Language Assessment
The Interim Director introduced STAMP, a nationally benchmarked language proficiency assessment aligned to ACTFL standards, now being administered in grades 2–5. This was previously shared at a January Coffee, but the Board context is worth noting. STAMP fills a real gap — the only prior French assessment was the DELF — and will produce individual student reports with growth targets plus school-level data comparable to other French immersion programs nationwide. A Board member with language education expertise endorsed ACTFL as a widely recognized standard. This is good work.
Finances: On Track, Timeline Not Provided
The Treasurer reported expenses at 57% through 58% of the year — on target. An unexpected $17K DPS technology bond offsets curriculum costs that bled over from last year. The working budget is essentially neutral with contingency intact, and fundraising is at ~50% of the $100K target with the gala still ahead.
Two watch items: fundraising execution (variable) and curriculum invoice timing (prior-year costs bleeding into the current year).
The Interim Director mentioned the FY27 budget is being built "this spring." No timeline, milestones, or Board review dates were provided. The school is already ordering instructional materials for next year before a budget is in place — the Board should confirm spending thresholds and reporting cadence for pre-budget commitments.
Executive Director Search: Four Finalists Advancing
The hiring committee closed applications with ~60 candidates and advanced four to interviews next week. Details are appropriately confidential given the active process.
Hiring: Board Discussion Revealed Uncertainty About Teacher Pathways
The Interim Director reported strong hiring momentum — 10–12 interviews completed, offers beginning to go out, candidates from both the Jules Verne program and other J-1 cultural exchange pathways.
But the Board discussion revealed uncertainty about how these pathways actually work. One Board member asked whether Jules Verne visas could be five years; another clarified that Jules Verne teachers are released by the French education system for a maximum of two years, while the broader J-1 cultural exchange visa can extend to five. A third noted that H-1B sponsorship is not financially feasible for the school.
Worth understanding: the limiting factor for Jules Verne isn't the program itself — it's the specific Académie the school has an MOU with (Grenoble). FASD isn't necessarily limited to Grenoble; establishing relationships with other Académies could diversify the pipeline. That takes work, but the Board should understand the options — and the discussion suggested they don't yet.
Governance Committee: Policy Inventory Underway
The newest Board member is leading two efforts: an annual board calendar for 2026–27 (notable mostly because it didn't already exist) and a policy inventory to identify what's in place, what's missing, and what's not accessible on the website. More next month.
Facilities, SAC, and PTO
Facilities: A town hall is being planned "hopefully before spring break" to update parents on the facility search. No firm date. DPS board member visits continue — one toured recently, the superintendent rescheduled to late March.
SAC: Meeting March 10th. The Interim Director — not a parent SAC co-chair — delivered the update. Committee members are reviewing bylaws, which have been sent to a community partner and the school's outside legal counsel.
PTO: The PTO Treasurer reported fundraising at 80–85% of last year's pace, with the gala still ahead. The PTO needs ~$63K from the gala and remaining events to match FY25. Ticket sales are already ahead of last year. On the governance side, the PTO executive team has been documenting fiscal policies, drafting bylaws, and establishing a public elections process — communications expected in the coming weeks.
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.
What the Board asked — and what it didn't
The Board asked good questions in a few spots: when offers might go out, whether there are budget concerns, and how the Choice numbers compare to prior years. Credit where it's due.
But the questions that weren't asked tell you more about how the Board is functioning:
The Board did not ask:
What caused the 240→229 enrollment miss this year, and what makes 245–250 more reliable
What the fix timeline is for the DLS waitlist error, or how to prevent recurrence
What the FY27 budget milestones are — draft date, committee review, Board vote
What spending authority exists for pre-budget purchasing
When the intent-to-return form goes out and when results will be shared by grade
When the sharpest question of the evening is "is there anything you're worried about?" — and the answer is a restatement of known risks — the oversight function isn't doing what it should.
The governance audit needs to be honest — not retroactive
The policy inventory is welcome work. But I'll be watching for a specific failure mode: the temptation to "discover" that policies existed all along but just weren't posted. That's not a transparency fix — it's a rewrite. We've seen this pattern before — bylaws that were "posted" but never officially passed, policies that existed in someone's head but not in any document. If the audit reveals gaps, the community deserves to know they were gaps, not to be told everything was fine all along.
The SAC should be presenting its own updates — and choosing its own counsel
The SAC exists under Colorado law to provide independent parent and community accountability for school performance. So its independence — real and perceived — matters.
When the Interim Director delivers the SAC report to the Board without a parent chair present or acknowledged, it reinforces the dynamic that the SAC operates as an extension of the administration rather than an independent body. Easy fix: have a parent chair present, or explain their absence.
Separately, both the SAC and PTO bylaws have reportedly been sent to the school's outside legal counsel for review. This is presumably the same firm whose CORA guidance has, in my experience, prioritized institutional defensiveness over statutory compliance. Having the school's counsel review the governance documents of bodies meant to provide independent oversight creates an inherent tension. Independent review would be more credible.
What to Watch in March
DLS fix: Written confirmation and timeline for resolving the fifth-grade waitlist error
Intent to return: When results are shared, and whether enrollment is reported by grade level
FY27 budget: Whether a development timeline with milestones and Board review dates is published
Facilities town hall: Whether a date is confirmed before spring break — and what decision timeline follows
ED search: Timeline for finalist process, stakeholder input, and announcement
Governance audit: First results from the policy inventory — and whether gaps are acknowledged honestly
~ Greg
