This and That, Monday, June 3,2024

Well-Resourced/Closed Schools Meetings

I heard that the Garfield meeting was a bit contentous. I’m hearing there are just not solid answers. One thing I find odd is that Superintendent Brent Jones has said if anyone has a better idea, they want to hear it but give over no time for that. And then, he says that they have looked at everything and this is the best way forward. Puzzling. 

As for the West Seattle meeting, I look to the West Seattle Blog

Though the first of this round of meetings was reported to have been contentious, this one only had one outburst, when an attendee yelled out that Dr. Jones should more aggressively push lawmakers to fix the persistent education-funding shortfall. Also of note, though the meetings were held regionally, there was almost nothing West Seattle-specific this morning, except for the question “Why build a new Alki Elementary when schools (will likely be) closing?”

(More on Alki in a minute.)

Jones said the balanced budget plan would be presented to the board this month. “We’re at a decision point” – and he contended that keeping all schools open would lead to staff cuts and class-size increases, as well as re-negotiating contracts and cutting or eliminating a variety of programs including athletics and preschool. Closures/consolidations would avoid all that, he said.

First of all, the district is always in a renegotiating mode given contracts are just 3 years. And cutting pre-K might actual save money; sure wish the City would pay for the space they use in Seattle Schools’ buildings. 

Yes, it’ll be disruptive, but teachers and administrators will get through – Dr. Jones told an anecdote he’s reported to have shared at other versions of this meeting, about changing schools multiple times as a child. “I’m inviting you all to come on this journey with us.” He insisted there’s no other option – “if there was (another) way, we would have already put it on the table.”

See? There’s no other way. 

The table we observed was facilitated by assistant superintendent Ted Howard, who said he’s the district’s “chief accountability officer.” (Previously, his experience included 16 years as principal of Garfield High School.) Rather than launching into Q/A, though, he launched into a speech to the table. In it, he continued trying to make the case for closures/consolidations. First he noted in speaking to the table that “schools are being asked to do a lot more” and said this is an “exciting” opportunity for community members to respond to the question of “what would you like to see” in schools. He said it’s a “deep” conversation – that schools have never been fully funded. 

Sounds like Howard didn’t want to get too many questions in. 

OK, said another participant, even at $2 million per school, that’s $40 million savings, but the deficit is $105 million, so what else will be done? Miscellaneous savings, Howard said, but the attendee pressed the point. It’s all “a moving target.” Eventually “will we lose some middle schools? Possibly. Will we lose some high schools? Possibly.” Another attendee asked about option (K-8) schools – she knew of one with a 60-student waitlist. Their fate depends on what the “needs and wants” identified by the community are. Another attendee questioned the plan to just “mothball” the closed schools – what about using them to generate income? she asked. They’re not looking at that, yet, Howard said.

Stunningly vague but options schools appear to be on the table. I would advise option school parents to participate in the Board’s community meeting on the next Strategic Plan to communicate those “needs and wants.” 

QUESTION: Will the district show detailed analysis of how these savings would be achieved, or is it just through staffing savings? Dr. Buttleman said that when Dr. Jones’s proposal is presented, it’ll have specifics on how much would save per school. He said some info had been added to the website last night. He added that about two-thirds of building savings would be maintenance, utilities, food services, etc.

Folks, you need to tell the Board that the proposal needs to be VERY detailed or else it’s just BS. 

QUESTION: What will happen with schools that are closing and what are the conditions of the closing schools? Podesta replied that building conditions are (part of how they’re making decisions) – some are in bad condition or they’re small buildings. He said there’ll be a short-term plan and long-term plan – former will keep all the buildings, an interim use will be identified – “we’ll maintain all the buildings, maintain all the grounds, we understand (many are community recreation spots)” – fields are in demand.

Yes, the fields are in demand but the district also has a joint-use agreement with the City they can’t back out of. Here’s a thought - back out of that agreement and let the City run a levy for field maintenance. There is no reason why it should largely fall to the district. That’s millions right there. 

QUESTION: What can the school board do with the plan? They can amend the plan or reject the plan, says Dr. Jones.

As if the Board would do that after months and months of work and meetings.  

QUESTION: Will each student get (support staff)? Buttleman said the Weighted Staffing Standards drive that – it would be “coming out of their work as to how the new staffing would look. … Some schools would have a fulltime nurse but not all schools.” Jones added, “This whole plan is predicated on having adequate support for our students.”

Whoa! Now, they are “adequately” supported schools? Because “a well-resourced school” would have a full-time nurse. 

QUESTION: What engagement if any has there been with state legislators? Dr. Jones said they meet with a state legislative delegation. “Our legislative delegation has been responsive … but we need you all to speak boldly (to them) about what SPS needs … if (school closures) is not an alarm going off, I don’t know what is.” Talk to them about ensuring that “basic education is funded,” he added. “Our legislators are listening to us,” but “we probably need to push even harder.” At that point someone shouted, “are you willing to do that publicly?” and another person shouted “Tax the rich!” Dr. Jones said he would lobby. That’s not enough, someone called out, saying Jones should call a news conference and make demands. Dr. Jones said, “I don’t know about ‘tax the rich’ and all that” and the attendee retorted, “It’s either tax the rich or tax working-class people.” Buttleman interjected that “engagement is happening” – he is meeting with legislators too.

Wonder how much either the Board or the Superintendent have met with legislators or spoken to legislators. 

He (Jones) acknowledges that the district’s been asked to “show your work” and says they’ll try harder to do that.

They have heard this through two meetings and come to this meeting unprepared to do that? It’s not gonna happen. 

QUESTION: What’s a real life example of a well resourced school? Jones said, “I don’t know if we have a single well-resourced school but we want a system of them.”

Really? He cannot think of one school that is an example of what he wants to see for all? Jones lacks so much political courage that it’s concerning. 

The last of these meetings will be a virtual one on Tuesday but the link has not been released. I’ll try to get it up but if not, check the district website.

Also to note, Director Gina Topp continues with her community meetings; the next one is Saturday, June 8th at 1 pm at High Point Library.

I mentioned Alki Elementary. The City has added a third day of testimony in the ongoing battle over whether SPS will get the many variances to city code that they need to rebuild it. Here’s the coverage from the West Seattle Blog:

That was the decision (to have a third day)  at the end of the second full day of testimony before city deputy hearing examiner Susan Drummond. She will decide whether to uphold the city’s decision to allow Seattle Public Schools to build the new, larger Alki Elementary with fewer parking spaces than zoning requires. 

The original design had no offstreet parking spaces, though 48 would be needed to comply with zoning. Nearby residents successfully appealed the city’s approval of the no-parking plan (as well as other “zoning departures” which were upheld). The district then proposed a new design with 15 spaces; the city approved it; a different group of nearby residents filed an appeal. That’s what’s being considered now.

WHAT’S NEXT: Both sides still have witnesses remaining, so that’s why they needed to extend the hearing another day. Testimony will resume at 9 am tomorrow (Monday, June 3) in the hearing room on the 40th floor of the Seattle Municipal Tower (spectators are allowed, or you can listen in by phone). If testimony has to go to a fourth day, Tuesday was discussed as a possibility. Once the hearing ends, hearing examiner Drummond will issue a written decision, typically after a few weeks.

One question that I see over and over is why they are rebuilding in a smaller spot (with no parking) rather than at the Lafayette Elementary site which is a much bigger spot. Why the district can’t answer that is troubling. Here’s an interesting reader comment:

Schmitz Park sits on 7.5 acres and Lafayette sits on 4.7 acres so why is SPS building a mega-sized well resourced school at the Alki site which is the smallest parcel in the district on 1.4 acres? The District knows there has been a signficant decrease in families who live close to Alki Elementary that walk, bike and roll to school and have observed a declining student enrollment to 271 students for years. Alki Elementary is definitely being rebuilt to accomodate the consolidation plan. The school will accomodate at least 540 or more students and 75 staff. 

This makes no sense in many ways but first and foremost is how the City of Seattle is planning urban development for the next 20 years in West Seattle as outlined in their most recent 2024 plan.  Has the District even considered the City’s plan since they design schools for 50 to 75 years? The four West Seattle Neighborhood Centers, previously termed Urban Villages, run north to south along California Avenue at the Admiral Junction, Alaska Junction, Morgan Junction and Westwood/Highland Park. These locations are where the City will be allocating funds for future density, growth, and resources to bike, walk and roll in West Seattle. The Alki neighborhood/school site will be an outlier community further away from the resources offered at the Admiral Junction Neighborhood Center.  

West Seattle High School and Madison Middle School will be further away for an elementary aged student to walk, bike or roll without some form of adult guidance. The Alki School location would rely on other forms of transportation, such as cars, since SPS does not provide bus accomodations to any student who lives within a 1 mile radius from their school. The City’s Urban Plan is to reduce the amount of cars in the future. It makes NO sense for SPS and the City to not plan accordingly and cohesively, now, for West Seattle’s future growth.