Updates on Growth Boundaries

Over at the Soup for Teachers Facebook page there was some unhappiness over what info is available at the SPS website around the Growth Boundaries.   Apparently some parents received an email about them but it had no link to the webpage (which means you would have had to search for it yourself.)  And here is the link.

And why are isn't the notice of translated materials in this email? It's easy to do an email with four other sentences at the bottom in other languages as a minimum - starting with: Spanish, Mandarin, Vietnamese, and Amharic or Somali.

 Eden Mack of the Seattle Council PTSA said complete information was sent out to all legislative PTA chairs and PTA presidents.

The district then sent this message out (apparently in response to complaints):

"My apologies. When I copied the message into the automated system, the link got lost, and I didn't notice. We will be sending an updated message with the link.

In general, only two elementary schools will see boundary changes next year, and those students will be grandfathered. Therefore, no elementary students will be changing schools because of boundary changes.

The two new middle schools, Eagle Staff and Meany, will open with only slight changes to the boundaries approved in 2013.

Here is the link: http://seattleschools.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=627...

Translated messages were sent to families who use use other languages.

The timing is not ideal as the board voted on Wednesday night, and we had told families that attended community meetings that we would share information with all impacted school communities quickly. Maps are in progress. With multiple amendments, we did not know what outcome to anticipate.

We will work to do better.

Tina Christiansen
Growth Boundaries Communications"

Two items of note. 

The Growth Boundaries page says nothing about possible changes to the Student Assignment Plan and upcoming SAP meetings.  I appreciate the volume of work involved but the boundaries and the enrollment plan are intertwined.  There should be a link at the Growth Boundaries page to the SAP.

Also, I was unable to attend the Work Session on the 2017-2018 Budget yesterday.  It was reported back to me that the $3M extra that staff had cited as the costs (transportation and otherwise) to the looming levy cliff of $71M is NOT all due to the Board-approved boundary changes.  Only about $1M is projected for those costs.  What's the other $2M? Various items like school supplies, staffing costs, etc.

As to why the staff put the blame on the extra $3M at the feet of the Board's vote on boundary changes (when it wasn't even the majority of the amount to boot) is anybody's guess.