The Common Council met 03/19/2025. Slightly less than 30 minutes were taken up with a presentation from Appleton Area School District Superintendent Greg Hartjes providing background on the District’s request for the Common Council to create an anti-truancy ordinance.
The Council was not given an opportunity to ask questions about the proposal or the information provided.
At the end of the Council meeting, Alderperson William Siebers (District 1) introduced a resolution that, if passed as written, would result in the City of Appleton enacting an ordinance that prohibits a person under 18 years of age from being a habitual truant. Per the resolution, the ordinance will be enacted “for a trial period of four school semesters, starting in the fall of 2025, after which time, a review of the success of the ordinance will be made by the City of Appleton, Outagamie County, and AASD with suggested, needed and agreed on changes being made.”
I’ve prepared a transcript of the presentation for download:
In some respects, the Power Point slides of the presentation speak for themselves, and there was not a lot the verbal presentation added to what was already on the slides.
Per the presentation, regularly missing school significantly negatively impacts students. During the 2023-2024 school year, 40.2% of high school students were habitually truant, 23.7% were chronically absent, and 20.3% of students were both habitually truant and chronically absent. A total of 811 high school students were not on track to graduate.
Superintendent Hartjes explained that there was a difference between habitual truancy and chronic absenteeism.
- Habitual Truancy is defined as a student missing all or part of 5 or more school days in a semester without an excuse. Habitual truancy is what the state anti-truancy statute addresses but it is not AASD’s greatest concern because they feel students can still be successful even if they miss all or part of 5 days in a semester.
- Chronic Absenteeism is defined as missing 10% or more of total school days, including both excused and unexcused absences. This was the type of absence that AASD was concerned about and what other school districts have started focusing on.
Superintendent Hartjes that there was some overlap between these two groups and last year 921 students qualified as both habitually truant and chronically absent which was twice the number of students who fell into that category prior to the pandemic. Of those 921 students, 110 still passed all of their classes last year and were academically successful even if they did not reach their maximum potential, but 911 had not passed all of their classes and were not on track to graduate.
He highlighted some of the negative outcomes for students who were not academically successful and concluded, “Ultimately, we think as adults we cannot allow teenagers to continually make decisions that will negatively impact their future.”
He also believed attending school was “an important factor in a student’s social and emotional development,” and believed this was particularly true for students who were struggling with mental health issues and had no supports at their homes. He went through a list of different resources that are available at school and concluded, “when we look at the challenges kids are facing with mental health, when they’re at home, they don’t have access to any of this. We can get them to school, this is where the support is for them.”
Stephanie Marta the AASD Attendance Coordinator briefly went over the current support system AASD had in place for students who are having attendance issues and explained how they differed from the previous system they had utilized. The said that the previous system had been more punitive in nature and included less partnership and collaboration with families and the community than the new system had.
As a last resort, they did refer some students to the county. She stated that during the 2023-2024 school year, they had 2,371 middle and high school students who met the criteria for habitual truancy. Of those, they ended up referring 116 to the county for additional supports.
Superintendent Hartjes stressed that they treat attendance issues differently than they did 5 years ago. “[A]s a district we recognize the need to change. We’ve done that, and we’ve taken away the punitive measures, and we really are very much supporting kids in a positive manner. Unfortunately, there’s some kids that isn’t reaching, and that’s what we’re asking for your help with are those kids.”
During the first semester of the 2024-2025 school year, they had 20 students who were enrolled but did not come to a single day of school. Another 18 students stopped attending at some point in the fall. “And so those are the students that were really struggling. Doesn’t matter how many times we call there, doesn’t matter how many times ago knock on the door. They aren’t responding. Those are the kids we’re worried about. They’re not engaging with us.” [I think it would have been helpful if alderpersons had been able to ask questions. I kind of wondered how AASD knew those students were genuinely absent. Is it not possible that some of these students moved away or have some other sort of education arrangement in place and just never formally disenrolled?]
AASD wanted an anti-truancy ordinance to be put in place so that they could have it as a tool to help deal with some of these difficult cases. Although state law requires students to attend school until the age of 18, that law is enforced at the local level, and there needs to be a municipal ordinance in order to do that. A local municipality not having an anti-truancy ordinance was out of the ordinary.
He stressed that they didn’t want to have a truancy court any more, but having an ordinance would still be beneficial and provide options. Superintendent Hartjes did not view such an ordinance as a school to prison pipeline and pointed out, “The school to prison pipeline happens when kids don’t graduate from high school or they graduate without the skills and the knowledge to be successful as an adult.”
He saw a teenager receiving a ticket for truancy as no different than a teenager receiving a ticket for speeding or underaged drinking or tobacco possession, saying, “There’s no connection there. There’s not a connection. Ultimately, we think as adults we cannot allow teenagers to continually make decisions that will negatively impact their future.”
He finished up by saying that they viewed using this proposed ordinance as a last resort. He also stressed that it was up to the Common Council to determine what consequences for truancy would be in this ordinance. He said that AASD wanted to try an ordinance out for a 4-semester trial period and then review the impact and determine if changes were needed.
The Common Council was not allowed to ask questions about the proposal.
Later in the meeting, a resolution written by Alderperson Siebers was introduced which would bring back the city’s old truancy ordinance for a 4-semester trial period. That resolution will go to the Safety and Licensing Committee on 03/26/2025 for review and an initial recommendation before coming to the Common Council for a final vote.
[It’s a little difficult to not view this entire presentation as grossly hypocritical given that actions speak so much louder than words and AASD made it abundantly clear during Covid that they did not view school as a necessary or important thing that should be prioritized. It seems a little late to be turning around now and pretending that it really is important when the lesson was already taught with devastating effect that in-person education is non-essential.]
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1254914&GUID=43F2E1EF-D349-49B9-90AF-1FCEF906F9FD
2 thoughts on “Superintendent Greg Hartjes Gives Presentation To Common Council On Truancy Issues Within Appleton Area School District; Alderperson William Siebers Introduces Resolution To Bring Back Appleton’s Anti-Truancy Ordinance”