Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting. In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance. - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Comments
The new 'plan' that will be unveiled will be a big departure from what is currently the theoretical 'plan'. But, seriously, will anybody be *surprised* by the surprise? What is surprising is how so few see this coming, when the first plan has several fatal flaws such that it could never be implemented.
The problem is that the new 'plan' also has very obvious and absolute fatal flaws, but, it probably will be adopted anyway, and then in 3 years time, when its obvious short-comings are apparent as more facilities' failures require emergency mitigations, new rounds of re-engineering boundaries and feeder patterns will be in order, scrambling siblings, friendships and families, AGAIN.
The ship has sailed on capacity, our District can no longer play fast and loose with facilities, the system is too brittle. Rational planning must be based on robust data and a 360° view of how families will respond when a Ferrari is bestowed upon them, or, a Lada. To be clear, nobody should or will be getting either. Although, one could posit that when you are assigned to a building that will clearly 'tip over' in 3 years times, that is a Lada. Seen in that light, many wholesale communities will be herded to Ladas with nothing to do but bare it. And, to be crystal clear, this District still does not have the data it needs to do a 3, 5, 8 year plan. And yet, they have been told, over and over and over...
The public can only take so much. Families left Seattle starting in the 70's. They are not leaving now. The city is slowly normalizing the households with children demographic. That is a major coup of urban planning and will create positive dividends for everyone living in our Emerald environs. Livability and quality of life for everyone choosing to make Seattle their home is going to be enriched and improved. Positive begets positive. However, repeating the repeating pattern of 'whoops, this isn't working, this must be fixed' is going to have long-term consequences: it will drain the goodwill of the public, both family and childless alike, and risk the continued support of crucial ed levies (for those who think McCleary will result in dollars to restore the operating budget of school districts, it will not, because the State has no money. You can't get blood from a stone, even if Judges say you will).
Trusting a District with large amounts of capital to get all of Seattle's public school students housed requires trust that they know what they are doing: the closures in West Seattle that are now being fully reversed, the whacky move-NOVA-out-then-move-them-back-in, the implementation of a new Language Immersion program in a new building LESS than a mile from an existing LI attendance area school, in an area that sends 51% of its children to private schools, etc. is going to catch up with them. It takes a lot to burn Seattle's ed-loving liberal base, but, the failure that will be set into motion with it's new 'plan' will blow up at preciously the wrong time. Passing the next Buildings, Technology and Academics (BTA) Levy (to be voted on in 2015!), which will be critical, yet, may be problematic if too many citizens recognize they are paying to reverse the continual steam of mistakes that could have and SHOULD have been avoided.
Stay tuned. Political courage, leadership, to do not just what is 'politically correct', but, which actually works as well as serves students, is needed, but, is not what is likely going to prevail. So, keep your ticket stubs, because, we are all going to be stuck watching this circus for a good long while. There won't even be an intermission.
Perhaps the expensive inefficiency, and, a spectacular flame-out is what is needed for our City and our State to get serious about pushing resources into our District.
-stay tuned
I will add that I don't believe it will take 3 years to revisit the boundaries issue because the high school issues will come up before then.
I don't think we need a flame-out - we need an intervention. I believe that may come in the form of whoever is the next mayor and it might be wise to consider being part of that process.
Below is a link to John Connolly articulating exactly why everyone in in any City should push for world class public schools.
Thanks,
Mike (concerned downtown parent)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1NuZ_8Nnt0
wondering
I was feeling punchy tonight and applied for an SDOT Safe Routes to School mini-grant to get reimbursement for my color copies, sign, markers, and snacks to testify about walk zones at the last School Board meeting.
http://www.midbeaconhill.blogspot.com/2013/10/beacon-hill-parents-seek-city-mini.html
Don't worry, there's no chance it'll get approved. I'm not even going to ask the principal to write the prerequisite letter of support. I just thought it was funny that the City is funding grants to encourage walking, while the district is trying to pull families out of walk zones.
Plus, International Walk to School Day is coming up on Tuesday.