Troubled by what they see as a perceived pattern that favors wealthier neighborhoods, some Shawnee Mission school board members have begun to discuss how the district should handle private donations, bequests and gifts.
A three-member task force of board members Jessica Hembree, Jamie Borgman and David Westbrook met for the first time on the topic last week. Their aim is to better understand the existing policies on donations and find a way to clarify the district’s position on how that money should be spent.
Almost every Shawnee Mission school board meeting includes at least one vote on whether to accept private donations and bequests. Often those votes are part of a consent agenda lumped in with various other non-controversial items.
But some board members have been uncomfortable with the limited descriptions and discussion of those donations and have asked for a fuller explanation of the mechanics and rules.
Perception of wealthy schools that have ‘whole different set of experiences’
The catalyst for the task force was a remark by Hembree during the April 15 full board meeting.
Hembree said she was grateful for the $300,000 in money raised by parent-teacher groups the board had voted on. But she said often the donation money that comes in ends up being spent on or is designated to a single feeder pattern. She didn’t name the feeder, but said that only 9% of students in its schools get reduced-priced lunch, while the average district-wide is 40%, and she felt a duty to call that out.
At the task force meeting, Hembree said, “Whether it’s fair or not fair, there’s a perception that there are wealthy schools in Shawnee Mission and they have a whole different set of experiences,” such as more reading specialists and nicer facilities. She said other schools are perceived as “poor schools that don’t have access to those same things.”
Hembree continued, “What I worry about is that we as a board have sort of sleepwalked into a set of policies, guidances and procedures, and that we just keep voting yes on these things and allowing that to happen without taking a couple of steps back.” Board members go to state meetings in Topeka and talk about equitable education, “and then we’re going to come back here to our own boardroom and keep on taking money in ways that we know fosters inequities,” she said.
Borgman drew a distinction between certain types of donations. “A community funded bake sale doesn’t bother me but a community funded position that one school is getting because they have donations” matters more because it might not be available to other schools that want it.
Westbrook also said he was particularly concerned about an imbalance in academic programs that could happen when the district accepts grants tied to fund positions in certain schools.
He warned that the district should not let the perception of rich versus poor schools go unaddressed. “Reversing that is much harder than preventing it,” he said.
Group drafts mission statement on handling gifts
Task force members drew up a mission statement to provide policy guidance for handling gifts that supports the district’s mission of “equal opportunity for high quality education regardless of a student’s address or the wealth of the neighborhood” in which the student lives.
Borgman said she’d like to see clearer policies to protect staff and give board members a better idea of what they are voting on. Existing policies require gifts of over $200 to be accepted by a school board vote, said Superintendent Michelle Hubbard, who attended the meeting. Other policies on the books deal specifically with library donations, gifts to staff, and public gifts to the district.
“At the end of the day, it’s vague,” said Borgman.
The group also grappled a bit with the size of their mission. Members asked for data on the topic for their next meeting so they can consider the scope of the issue. For instance, should they consider just gifts for academic programs or should extracurriculars like theater and sports be covered? And should there be a distinction between donations and grants, which are usually written by principals at individual schools?
“I would ask our community to be patient with us as we work through this,” Westbrook said. School leaders will have to make sure that they end up with a fair way of dealing with gifts that does not dampen the enthusiasm of potential donors, he said. “But it will be messy.”
Patron voices thoughts on SM East-feeder pattern schools
The meeting was attended by about a dozen observers. Judith Deedy, of Mission Hills, said she believes the scrutiny is aimed at donations benefiting Shawnee Mission East feeder schools.
Deedy, whose children grew up in the district, remembered when her children’s school, Belinder Elementary, needed to add a reading aide a few years back. The district took the part-time aide planned for Belinder and placed the position in a school with more needs, she said.
“It wasn’t like we didn’t need it,” she said, adding that in the end the elementary school was able to backfill by paying for the reading aide through donations.
Not allowing donations to pay for positions could leave the East schools without needed staff, she said, to the detriment of future enrollment. State school funding is always tight and there’s pressure for all schools to supplement, she said.
“I’m very pro equity and pro equal opportunities,” Deedy said. “I just think we get a little narrow when we start thinking of this as an us-versus-them. We’re still in the public school system. Nobody’s got a gold-plated gymnasium.”
The next task force meeting is 1 to 2:30 p.m. July 19 at the Center for Academic Achievement.
