- what about the distance tiebreaker?
- is there going to be an official transition period and how long will it be?
- if there is an official transition period, will the district entertain the idea of grandfathering those siblings who are incoming during it? My feeling is that the district (and the Board) may be taking a hard line on this BUT might be persuaded to a middle ground. Please note that word - middle. I personally don't agree that every single student in SPS today should also get all their siblings into the same school. BUT it seems like if there is a transition period, they could grandfather those sibs in and then give a date like September 2011 and say, "If you are in SPS on this date, you can remain at whatever school you started at. The sibling tiebreaker applies under the new SAP rules." Seems like a compromise.
Also, FYI, as I mentioned I told the Board that they really should approve this SAP unless the district has a detailed and concrete plan for capacity issues whereever they are in the district. For example, in the NE , they could go to the Mayor and ask for fasttracking of any permitting to reopen a closed building. Or the district could take some of the BTA II money (currently sitting at $56M) and redirect it to buying portables (yes, I know there's the statements from the district that they can't even order them but I'd have to see it to believe it). We do have the money and yes, some other project wouldn't happen but is this an emergency? Do we want the new SAP to have the best chance to succeed so we can move onto to REAL issues like academics and how to help all the schools achieve?
What the Board needs to do is not listen to Facilities. As Charlie says, facilities should not be the tail that wags the dog in this district.