Growth Boundaries - Amendments 11

Amendment #11 - Smith-Blum - target feeder patterns for Central District
Carr - how is this different from what is currently proposed?
Libros - entirely different feeder pattern
Smith-Blum - John Muir, Leschi and Kimble
Libros - right.  The thing to understand is that if lines or patterns look like they don't make sense, I understand that but it was made based on the numbers.  If Kimble stays in Mercer, Mercer will be overcapacity.  If some don't go to Meany, it will be underenrolled and Washington will be overenrolled.
Smith-Blum - 8 elementaries to Meany Middle Schools and my point is the unpredictable growth in Central- north.  We are going to have, what I believe and community analysis, we are going to have huge growth.  Stevens went from 48% -74% birth-K capture rate.  
Carr - I get that but trying to map that to middle school in 2017.
DeBell - We have been working six months with staff's data and it's great that we have community analysis and data but there's no logic to overloading Mercer. 
Smith-Blum - if we stick with current patterns, we WILL overload Mercer.
Peaslee - if we don't do this until 2017, can't we delay this decision?
Libros - as routine part of work, we look at data to see which to implement in plan but need a starting point to work from.  
Peaslee - change amendment a year from now with more current numbers and then we would recommend changes based on that.
Smith-Blum - I would like to embed into plan for Superintendent to look at new data over next two years.
McLaren - not necessary because of part of staff process?
Smith- Blum - doesn't say that in plan
Carr - don't know that Growth Boundaries but NSAP says that.
More discussion.
Changing amendment - to review feeder patterns but go forward with what is in Version 3.0.
DeBell - like to know what staff is comfortable with including housing starts, etc. More staff and time?
Libros - we do have a contractor collecting data and when we get past this, we will get back to that.  It will help us refine and be more precise.

Had to re-read three times with the changes.

Vote - 5-2 (with DeBell and Martin-Morris against)


Anonymous said…
thanks, melissa. e
Tough Situation said…
Two years ago, against Kay Smith-Blum's advice, Martin Morris and Maier forced the sale of MLK out of committee. Smith-
Blum was very upset because she knew MLK would be needed and she knew certain data points were not included in growth predictions. The Corporate Board sold valuable and needed property below market value.

The Board is very aware that the district does NOT have a good track record. Several years ago, the district closed five schools and reopened them shortly after closing schools. Again, this action was very expensive and disruptive.

To me, Seattle is booming and board members desperately attempt to get data in front of the district. Isn't the city helping with data, too?

There was a time when the board didn't want to split families with elementary school children into two different schools. Tracy Libros warned that capacity issues would not allow families to stay together. The board voted to keep families together and one year later, capacity issues forced families into two different schools.

The district has a long history of failed promises, and the vulnerable students at the World School have been shifted around, too much.

Testimony to keep Pinehurst open was powerful and I'm glad for families whose children's needs are being met at Pinehurst. Clearly, these students could fall through the cracks at other schools.mercs11

We also have a neighborhood assignment plan, option schools and schools that meet the needs of varying students.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

COVID Issues Heating up for Seattle Public Schools