Growth Boundaries - Amendment 4-7

Amendment#4 - DeBell/Martin-Morris - Middle Schools/APP - PASSES
Peaslee - ? on North end analysis 
Libros - identifies feeder patterns, see initial numbers of how many APP students expected over next few years and feeder patterns.  Long discussion at Work Session of this issue. Start JAMS and then W-P program, and potential changes to APP but have flexible capacity w/o changing structure.  If okay at JAMS, then they could phase out at Hamilton.  Can expand and contract without changing the entire patterns.  
Peaslee - This is for alternate #2?
Libros - Yes
Peaslee - what would be impact of grandfathering Hamilton APP?
Libros - no one liked 6th grade roll-up even if a lot of them.  Moved to geo-split model and that's what we built this around.
Peaslee - What is impact of grandfathering at Hamilton?
Libros - Eckstein and Hamilton would both have severe capacity problems.  Hamilton cannot have portables and Hamilton is struggling this year.  JAMS would then be underenrolled.
Smith-Blum - cohort of APP in 8th grade at Hamilton at not that many, would that break the camel's back?
Other staff - did look at numbers and there are 68 8th grade APP students.  Comes down to grandfather into Hamilton, that would put them over by that number. 
Peaslee - public testimony tonight said that Hamilton APP sent to JAMS but not Gen Ed Hamilton students?
Libros - not correct, not separated out that group
Martin- Morris - if you something different for Hamilton rather than Eckstein, it's an equity issue so you'd need to do both.
Staff - issue of costs
McLaren - issue of students being in multiple buildings but maybe not as bad if they move as a cohort.
Smith-Blum - I broadly agree with amendment but we are talking about human beings.  We have to start a JAMS cohort.  Very sympathetic with 8th graders.  I hesitate to vote against it and this is a special group that has been moved around repeatedly.  I hear you Director Martin-Morris about equity but I would appreciate the consideration for these students.
DeBell - already over the numbers and we don't have the annex at Lincoln now.
Martin-Morris - there is no space and we will tip Hamilton over.

Vote - 7-0

Amendments #5 and 6 were withdrawn earlier.

Amendment #7 - DeBell - Dearborn  Park - PASSES
He stated the school was underenrolled and this could fill the school if it were an International School.  This amendment postpones that and allows it to be an International School for a year while being an attendance area school and then make the decision for the change.
McLaren - students can apply to any attendance area school?
Libros - yes
DeBell - doesn't establish geo-zone until Option school

Vote - 7-0

Amendment #8 - Patu - no changes to District 7 boundaries and to reassess the boundaries
DeBell - nobody fights harder for their district than Betty Patu.  That said, you reference District #7 which is based on voting precincts, are there issues there with attendance area boundaries?
Patu - no, I don't think so.
Libros - it might be clearer if it says Mercer/Aki Kurose services areas

Comments

Anonymous said…
This unreality show ends the same way it started: The contempt some of these directors apparently have 4 each other is crazy train.

Martin Morris only woke up two times tonight: To jab Peaslee and to raise his voice at Smith-Blum. Called her amendment unethical. That's a slap across the face board-style.

Then there was Smith-Blum and DeBell digging at each other with snide asides, gritted teeth and Cheshire smiles.

The number of split votes 3-4, 4-3 was like a tennis match. No doubt it means we're destined to relive the boundary issues all over again. And as for advanced learning in this district? Give up the ghost of a hope for the next 2-3 years. What a disaster. No cogent plans.

Furious Viewer

11/21/13, 12:02 AM
Anonymous said…
Shame on this board of directors.

Thousands of comments & emails from parents to strike down the growth boundaries plan. Lack of thorough community engagement by SPS. Confusion--even amongst the board--as to what the amendments meant.

Students first = No

Communities first = No

What a disgrace.

--Sad NE parent
11/21/13, 12:18 AM
ws said…
what about Fairmount park and WS APP? wasn't that amendment 4?
11/21/13, 5:54 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, gr...
Read more

Education News Roundup

From the ever-amusing Washington Policy Center : Vouchers are Pell Grants for students under 18.  Vouchers are no different than Pell Grants or GI benefits, except the money goes to the families of students younger than age 18.  Except they are. Pell Grants were created to help needy students and that's not really the goal of the voucher program.  The Pell grant website does have a couple of great studies on why low-income students drop out before finishing their higher ed and what makes a difference.
Read more