Two huge amendments to the SAP for tonight's Board meeting, both from Sherry Carr.
First one is about siblings.
On page 6, delete the following text:
- The transition plan will include procedures so entry grade siblings and older siblings have
the opportunity to be assigned to the same school (which may be the new attendance area
school) if requested. This does not assure assignment of the entry grade sibling to the older
sibling’s current school.
- If the parent/guardian indicates that the priority is to have the siblings attend the
same school and space is not available at the older sibling’s current school (or for both
siblings at any other schools requested), the siblings will be assigned to the new attendance
And insert the following:
The issue of “grandfathering” incoming kindergarten siblings is not part of the Student
Assignment Plan itself, but is an implementation issue. It is the Board’s desire to address
“grandfathering” of incoming kindergarten students as part of the transition plan, provided
that this is feasible without displacing incoming attendance area kindergarten students. The
transition plan will address this issue.
Now when this "transition period" will be announced is anyone's guess but I believe the Board has heard loud and clear that they need one for siblings. I also think they will include a date after which NO more siblings will be grandfathered. For now, this would place a hold (or marker) on the language currently in the SAP until it is addressed later.
Second one is about directing the Superintendent to evaluate elementary and middle school capacity across the district. Here's the language, note the bold (which I inserted here):
"I move that the Superintendent be directed to evaluate elementary and middle school
capacity across the district and to make recommendations to add capacity, including
opening one or more schools (including at least Wilson-Pacific, John Marshall, Sand
Point, McDonald, Viewlands and/or Old Hay) if necessary. The evaluation of elementary
school capacity, including any necessary board action, would be complete in time for
dissemination of information prior to open enrollment for 2010—11 school year. The
evaluation of middle school and K-8 capacity and facilities, including Jane Addams, will be included in the BEX IV capital program planning. Therefore, there would be no change to the Jane Addams K-8 program prior to completion of BEX IV levy planning in 2013."
So Sherry is advocating for JA to remain a K-8 for at least 3+ years. Is that enough?
I am still mystified at this capacity issue. They have a building evaluation, they have a functional capacity evaluation, they have the demographics and they soon will (and already do have and I'll post it later) a preliminary BEX IV list.