More From the Seattle Times

In something of a non-story -if you know Seattle history - the FYI Guy at the Seattle Times, Gene Balk, wrote about private school enrollment in SPS. The K-12 enrollment at private schools has always been 25%+ and now charters take some of that along with an uptick in homeschooling. 

I recall long ago being aghast at that percentage but I always got a shrug from every superintendent I ever mentioned it to. The district NEVER put forth any real effort to attract even a small percentage of those back. They are not in a good place now to do that, either.

Census data released this month shows private-school enrollment for Seattle K-12 students hit an all-time high in 2023, estimated at 19,400 students. That represents one-quarter of the city’s total 77,200 K-12 students.

Among the nation’s 50 cities with the largest K-12 enrollment, Seattle ranked No. 2 for the share of kids in private schools last year. San Francisco was No. 1 with around 30% of K-12 students enrolled in private schools. Census data shows that nationally, 12.8% of K-12 students attended private school, so Seattle’s percentage is nearly double the national average.

With the impending closure of some of the city’s schools, it is possible the share of kids in private schools will only increase.

It’s certainly not cheap to send a kid to private school in Seattle. According to the website Private School Review, average private-school tuition in Seattle is $20,977 for elementary schools and $23,708 for high schools, higher than the national average.

Comments (all bold mine)

- In my opinion (and per a Seattle Times op-ed piece by a former school board member) the proposed closure school program -- which seems to almost overtly target the more affluent areas of Seattle such as Laurelhurst, Madison Park and Capitol Hill -- will accelerate the flight of affluent parents/children. 

To me, it's insane -- school funding is done based on enrollment, so fewer students, less money. I think the only thing preventing another 10% of students (or choose your number) from departing will be the lack of capacity in private schools -- Lakeside, Bush, Holy Names, O'Dea, etc., won't/can't expand enough to take on even more students.

Public schools serve all, and, having affluent parents in your population certainly helps fund programs such as theater. And affluent or no, losing students means losing funding.

- According a recent ProPublica piece, disruptive students in classrooms, is one of the reasons that wealthier families take their kids out of public schools. The Seattle School District should consider the disproportionate impact that disruptive students have on the education of students of color and the impact of driving wealthier families from the district.

- Who wouldn’t want their kids in private schools. No disruptive students protected by soft policies. No special ed students to drain your funds. No bad kids who you are required to keep in class. No parents constantly threatening administrators who try to discipline their kids. You have a thoroughly vetted group of kids without the realities of the general student population. 

 

Next, Danny Westneat chimes in yet again in another column, The Way Out of this Crisis for Seattle School? Retreat. 

Two years ago, after Seattle teachers had gone on strike and won a 14% pay increase, this newspaper ran a little-commented-on story about how the school district didn’t have the money to pay for it.

“District officials have already projected budget shortfalls for the next three school years, and the union contract is adding about $94 million to that shortfall,” it said.

Down below, there were only 11 reader comments. Someone with the handle “curiousity” left the last word, on Sept. 29, 2022.

“Where is the money going to come from to cover the shortfalls? Closing schools?”

Yes, that reader certainly did nail it.

I’m a union guy, so I don’t begrudge the educators gunning for the best deal they could get. It’s the other side — the management — that’s supposed to be a counterweight. It’s their job to be able to say “no.”

Instead, what the School Board and district management said back then were things like: “I believe that we reached a good collective bargaining agreement, and that it comes with a price with extraordinary deficits.”

So, did SEA think that SPS was blowing smoke and DID (or could find) the money? Hard to say but that might be true.

Or: “My hope is that it’ll all be worth it.”

That last was from the superintendent, Brent Jones. Hope is not a strategy, as some military general supposedly said. And here it’s what’s left us, Seattle, in a bit of a pickle.

Westneat says:

I would gently suggest that the way out may be found in part by going back to that $231 million employment contract. And in part by looking forward — toward attracting new students into the public schools.

He also thinks the Board meeting shows that the Board isn't ready to close 20 schools. I would agree but I'll bet that if the district comes back with some kind of "student outcomes" in a new plan with say, 12 schools, the Board will okay it. 

Naturally, I don't know if I believe that will be a unanimous vote and, for a topic like school closures, the Board damn well should act in unison.

That’s good, because closing many of the most popular schools and programs would be a slow-rolling catastrophe for Seattle’s public system. It would take years to recover.

The statement above echoes what former director Michael DeBell said in his recent op-ed in the Times. 

Next, Westneat asks an intriguing question (and I had noticed this myself):

That’s a start but would mean more cuts elsewhere. Nobody is talking about this, but buried in a budget presentation recently was the fact that each 1% of salary reduction across the district produces $7 million in savings. So to avoid closing any schools (which was estimated to save about $25 million to $30 million), the school workforce, including administrators, could take a 4% salary cut.

If you were a teacher or principal, would you take 4% less to save your own school?

That schools labor contract didn’t pencil from the day it was signed. Going back on it a bit to forestall a spiraling crisis in Seattle public education ought to at least be on the table. Plus it’s easier to reverse, if the state ponies up more money, than emptying 20 schools.

Yes, BUT even if you get the "close 20 buildings" money, the district STILL is in the hole. And the cuts to fill that hole are not going to be paper cuts. AND, the district has to pay back the money they borrowed from the capital size - with interest - by 2026. 

Here's one Times' reader comment on that across-the-board salary reduction idea:

I am an SPS employee who was anti-strike back in 2021. It was supposed to be about improving Special ED funding, but turned into a money grab, driven by the rapid progressives who have sunk their teeth into our establishment and the union. 

I, for one, would be willing to take a pay cut to keep schools open and communities intact. I'd also like to see the underused John Stanford building (SPS headquarters) closed, and top level admin given office space in our schools. Let them be emergency substitutes, keeping them in touch with the very reason that SPS exists: the students.

What about looking forward?

As for looking forward, it still baffles me that the district has done so little to try to win back its fleeing market share.

How to do this? Give ‘em what they want. Which is more academic rigor, more options, more sizzle.

Instead of closing, say, the beautiful old Stevens Elementary building on Capitol Hill, why not turn it into a foreign language immersion school, or a fine arts academy? Not everyone would want to attend this, but I guarantee some would stampede to it.

There should be more of these magnet schools all over the city, for all types of families and students. Such as another South End STEM K-8 to roll up into the successful Cleveland High science and tech program. 

Dreaming? Yes. But we’ve got to rally around our public schools, Seattle. Without them the whole premise of democracy and an equal opportunity society collapses.

One of his better columns.