Part Three of Interim Meeting
We are getting close to the vote and yet the directors seem to have endless questions. It is quite clear that directors do not see these enrollment and boundary issues the same way (and watch for that to come out when boundaries start being considered).
Patu - Pegi, if rolling up middle school, can we do this in 6 months time?
McEvoy - Deferred to Phil Brockman.
Brockman - We would have to immediately hire a planning principal and contact communities and have those meetings. Have a marketing campaign. (But DeBell says marketing costs money so wouldn't that be as bad as a recruiting campaign?)
Martin-Morris - worried about recruitment idea, it's "squishy". True but you have NO idea what parents are going to choose given the churn that is happening now.
DeBell - surprised that time is running out for this vote. He thinks people DO know their choices. (Boy, that's a big statement given how busy many parents are especially those who are have challenges like single parents, low-income, etc.) We haven't thoroughly analyzed the amendment (and we have for all these other plans?). He says that the new middle school will be more "personalized" and for Special Ed and ELL students who have issues at Eckstein. (Meaning the new JA MS will take all those students as well? Interesting.)
Sherry - issues of equity, enrichment funding to JA K-8 versus Broadview-Thompson. It's not a "one-sided equation." "Better solution that impacts the most students in a positive way" is opening JA MS.
Peaslee - Well, what about costs if you move both K-8s to John Marshall and many families leave those schools because of the movement and go BACK to their feeder schools. That will have a tremendous impact on the NSAP and those costs have not been vetted either.
Smith- Blum - worried about three feeder schools, families visited open houses thinking those would be their school and now we change that. It does feel inequitable. We did that before and we need equity lens in all we do. She appears to be voting yes to the amendment.
He is really pushing hard and I have no idea how McLaren will vote. Pins and needles.
McLaren - I want more time to talk. The things that I see that DeBell points out is that amendment is not analyzed. I disagree and it's almost the same as a week ago. Told in good faith one week ago that it is a viable solution. I don't see the "squish" in the recruitment idea.
She spoke quietly but passionately. "I don't think urgency to do something now should overwhelm doing the right thing for equity."
Martin-Morris - not sure what people mean by equity. He says good and quality schools for all but he misses the point of HOW you treat parents and students while meeting that goal. Families have been asking for this for a very long time.
Time for the vote on Peaslee amendment:
Smith- Blum - yes
Carr - no
DeBell - no
McLaren - yes
Patu - yes
Peaslee - yes
Martin-Morris - no
Amendment passes, 4-3
Patu - Pegi, if rolling up middle school, can we do this in 6 months time?
McEvoy - Deferred to Phil Brockman.
Brockman - We would have to immediately hire a planning principal and contact communities and have those meetings. Have a marketing campaign. (But DeBell says marketing costs money so wouldn't that be as bad as a recruiting campaign?)
Martin-Morris - worried about recruitment idea, it's "squishy". True but you have NO idea what parents are going to choose given the churn that is happening now.
DeBell - surprised that time is running out for this vote. He thinks people DO know their choices. (Boy, that's a big statement given how busy many parents are especially those who are have challenges like single parents, low-income, etc.) We haven't thoroughly analyzed the amendment (and we have for all these other plans?). He says that the new middle school will be more "personalized" and for Special Ed and ELL students who have issues at Eckstein. (Meaning the new JA MS will take all those students as well? Interesting.)
Sherry - issues of equity, enrichment funding to JA K-8 versus Broadview-Thompson. It's not a "one-sided equation." "Better solution that impacts the most students in a positive way" is opening JA MS.
Peaslee - Well, what about costs if you move both K-8s to John Marshall and many families leave those schools because of the movement and go BACK to their feeder schools. That will have a tremendous impact on the NSAP and those costs have not been vetted either.
Smith- Blum - worried about three feeder schools, families visited open houses thinking those would be their school and now we change that. It does feel inequitable. We did that before and we need equity lens in all we do. She appears to be voting yes to the amendment.
He is really pushing hard and I have no idea how McLaren will vote. Pins and needles.
McLaren - I want more time to talk. The things that I see that DeBell points out is that amendment is not analyzed. I disagree and it's almost the same as a week ago. Told in good faith one week ago that it is a viable solution. I don't see the "squish" in the recruitment idea.
She spoke quietly but passionately. "I don't think urgency to do something now should overwhelm doing the right thing for equity."
Martin-Morris - not sure what people mean by equity. He says good and quality schools for all but he misses the point of HOW you treat parents and students while meeting that goal. Families have been asking for this for a very long time.
Time for the vote on Peaslee amendment:
Smith- Blum - yes
Carr - no
DeBell - no
McLaren - yes
Patu - yes
Peaslee - yes
Martin-Morris - no
Amendment passes, 4-3
Comments
PrettyComplicated