Friday, October 11, 2013

Central Growth Boundaries

Let's hear your thoughts (I haven't read them yet.)


Anonymous said...

WMS feeder schools - Bailey Gatzert, Thurgood Marshall and Kimball only. The size of WMS looks to be shrinking significantly?

-GHS Parent

Anonymous said...

And check out the size of the Meany MS assignment area, it is huge.

The proposal for how to handle the TT Minor neighborhood is still very disrespectful of a neighborhood proper. I've been jogging through the area recently and it has gentrified quite a lot (for better or worse for those who came before them).


Lynn said...

Meany is expected to have 850 students and Washington will have 883. This takes into account the 500 or so APP students at Washington.

Anonymous said...

The latest proposal leaves me with more new questions than answers:

1. Why did Stevens' and McGilvra's boundaries change so much?

2. Is the plan still to open Meany by busing kids to Old Van Asselt for the first three years? The fact that Leschi and Muir are now in the Meany reference area seems almost like a ploy to make sure enough Meany families are forced to accept that to make a viable school even if the North Capitol Hill parents -- those who live farthest from Van Asselt -- revolt and move their kids elsewhere.

3. How many K-5 age kids actually live in South Lake Union, Downtown and Pioneer Square anyway? Those are Lowell's boundaries, and they seem to include mostly nightlife districts, shopping, hospitals, office buildings and tourist attractions. Is this really going to fill up a half-empty school?

4. Does putting Muir into the Meany reference area mean no Spectrum program at Lowell?

- Confused

joanna said...

The middle school numbers are only true with moving Kimball from Mercer to Washington. These would all go to Meany: Leschi
Lowell, Madrona, McGilvra, Montlake, John Muir, Stevens, Madrona, leaving Gatzert
Kimball,and T.Marshall at Washington. Look at the proposed high school assignments for Central and Southeast Seattle. Really is there time for community input when the rules and proposals change so drastically? Or is really just the underlying politics? A November vote on something that will work under these circumstances is not possible. A lot of overwhelmed well-educated WTF (an acronym that I don't usually use, but have seen and heard enough tonight that I cannot possibly ignore it.) Help..
The District should be sued for ignoring their own guiding principles on all assignments including the elementary school ones. It just proves that area 42 and 43 will always be the area with the students (the area around TT Minor) left on the fringes to be disrupted and distributed for the needs of other schools. They have again been diced and sliced to other schools to which they cannot walk. Yet the area in general could and easily would fill TT Minor. I have held my tongue to some degree here. Every time I look at this new proposal I see something new that worries or upsets me. I need time to breath.

CliffM said...

Re Confused's #4: The new version shows both Muir and Lowell as Spectrum sites with the Meany Middle School service area. Kimball has become the Spectrum elementary feeding Washington M.S. (See 7th page of Growth Boundaries Attachment B.)

Lynn said...


The only change I see mentioned for high school is a new APP IB at RBHS. Did you see something else? I do think it's odd to bring Kimball students up to Washington for Middle School and then send them back to Franklin for High School. That must be what they're planning - there's no room at Garfield.

joanna said...

True, these are optional plans for high schools. But, it is a big change to comprehend. And, then getting and understanding real data for comment in such a short turn around time has me concerned. People need a chance to talk among themselves to think things through. Why were they not proposed earlier for comment and analysis? For years Muir has been sent to Washington then to Franklin. If Muir went to Mercer along with keeping Kimball at Mercer, then World School for sure could remain at Meany. I believe there is room for expansion either at Aki or Mercer, and both Kimball and Muir are much nearer Mercer. Also a least a part of if not all of Lowell could be assigned to McClure. The number of seats in the K-8s is not included on the maps so that it looks like all middle schoolers would have to fit into the comprehensive middle schools. I believe that the comprehensive middle school choice should be available to all, but it the K-8s are being planned according to demand then a number of students will be there and not in the larger schools.

I have concerns that there aren't enough students in the Central/Southeast/Southwest to maintain 2 really robust high school APP pathways. Remember QA and all of North Seattle have one to Ingraham. Also in initial stats QA is always part of the Central Region then pulled out for school assignments, which is a disadvantage for analysis. Magnolia seems like a natural match for north part of Seattle, but QA free of a Mercer mess could be aligned with some of the Capitol Hill and Central District schools. Mass transit is direct to Garfield. And, I do have hope for the Mercer Mess within the next few years. I have been very concerned about Washington Middle School. Is it really necessary to take a popular program apart when there are other options. Then the entire school could be moved as one while they renovate the Washington site, which is a large and roomy campus. The elementary school assignments are really weirdly drawn. Madrona expanding north makes sense according to the guiding principles. The map depicting the schools and their number of nearest students is interesting. If TT Minor were in the mix it would be even more interesting and a much greater number of students would not require transportation. I think all the areas should get maps like pages 11 and 12 in attachment B. There are a many parents whose comments were ignored.

joanna said...

ok, now I have read the document and mainly digested the Washington/Meany area comments on middle schools and elementary schools, many more than I anticipated. The District did capture many of the comments, the new plan does not reflect those comments.

Charlie Mas said...

Some things here just don't look right, but I'm not sure how they could be fixed.

The inclusion of John Muir in the Meany attendance area looks like a real stretch. It should be with either Washington or even Mercer instead, right?

Leschi should be in the Washington service area, shouldn't it?

But then what would come out?

If Leschi and Muir are shifted out of the Meany service area, then what would shift in? Gatzert, I suppose. That's a minus one change.

Then Washington's feeder schools would be T. Marshall, Leschi, and Muir. Two in and two out.

Kimball would shift into the Mercer attendance area, but what would shift out? Hawthorne, I suppose, but Kimball is a lot bigger than Hawthorne. You can't compensate with Wing Luke because Wing Luke is getting rebuilt with a 650 capacity and will be even bigger than Kimball.

It's tricky and there is no clear solution.

Maureen said...

Wow! If I'm interpreting QAE's map (p. 19) correctly: It looks like they have finally officially denounced the original idea that a Geo Zone is for peole who can see the school from their house. Geo Zones are now officially all about capacity management and not community or walkability. Eastlake (and other neighborhoods) might want to start writing their Board testimonies.

Lynn said...

If we're looking to make more schools walkable and cut transportation costs, Gatzert, T Marshall, Leschi and TT Minor should feed to Washington and APP should move to Meany.

Madrona could be a K-5 APP-only school - families in the attendance area aren't choosing it now and it is closer to where most APP students live. TT Minor would be a neighborhood elementary and leased space in South Lake Union for the World School?

Washington would be TT Minor, Gatzert, Leschi and T Marshall.

There aren't enough students in the central and south regions for two APP high school pathways. The district doesn't want to let students into Garfield who are new to APP. This is their fix for those students.

Anonymous said...

Leschi students across the street (Jackson) and also kitty corner (23rd) from Washington are now proposed to go miles away to Meany. This is ridiculous.

Leschi parent

Anonymous said...


You are correct - the QAE GeoZone starts 7 blocks away from the school. Unbelievable. If I were an parent at another Option School, I'd be very worried at the precedent it would set should it stay that way.

I'm sure the Coe parents are thrilled, John Hay may be surprised that none of their Attendance Area families will have preference to QAE.

QA Parent

Anonymous said...

Take a look at the Meany and Washington MS proposed boundaries (pgs 2 & 9) and then look up Seattle on this site and compare the household income levels:

Look at how carefully the elementary school assignment zones have been arranged. Notice any patterns emerging?


Anonymous said...

Maureen and QA Parent make an important observation. Geozones are no longer about letting students in an option school's walk zone attend that option school. They are now a capacity management tool.

But if it gets Coe to lay off with the "turn QAE into a neighborhood school" talk, then maybe it's worth it?

I have been thinking for a while that QAE would be a great choice to be the SLU/downtown school (if there has to be one, which I have never believed there did). It would be great being near all those tech companies with our tech focus, and being nearer to Seattle Center could be a boon to our project based learning. I would guess that a lot of families wouldn't mind too much if they had to pop down the hill--a lot of parents work downtown or in SLU anyway, so it might make after school care easier and more convenient for some families. And, then QAE's buildings can be turned into a neighborhood school, and Coe and Hay get relief from crowding. Also, the district might not even need to spend the BEX money on the addition, and could use it for something else.

But, since I don't live on the hill, maybe I underestimate the school community's commitment to being on the QAE campus.

QAE Parent

Anonymous said...

At first I found it odd that the district would give Coe the entire geo-zone for QAE, but then I realized the alternative would be to change the Coe/Hay boundary (extending the Hay boundary northward). That would upset a lot of parents and cause many sibling splits. Maybe they are trying the path of least resistance first?? I agree, it sets a horrible precedent. QAE should be in the QAE geo-zone.