The Seattle Times' Editorial Board on Closures of SPS Schools

I hope to put out a longer post on the wave of school closures that is sweeping the country but here's what The Seattle Times Editorial Board had to say today. The headline:

Handled Correctly, School Closures in Seattle Could Be a Win

Well, isn't that a hedge? Especially because there is no one "right way" to close schools. But they seem to think Superintendent Ben Shuldiner is headed in the right direction.

This is not a new discussion for SPS, where many of the schools under consideration enroll fewer than 200 students. But the person leading these talks, Superintendent Ben Shuldiner, is proceeding in a manner so different from his predecessor there’s reason to hope for a better outcome. For the financial health of the district, and Shuldiner’s future here, that’s imperative.

Then they make a statement I think is key to Shuldiner's plan:

While the likely savings could help with SPS’ $87 million budget deficit, Shuldiner is framing this conversation as one driven primarily by educational goals, rather than dollars.

Shuldiner has expressed shock over the building condition he sees from school to school. What did the Times say?

This is not equity, despite years of School Board rhetoric on that score. Zing!

The Editorial Board also seems to think his timeline is fine. I disagree because the parent involvement runs smack-dab into the holidays.

Generally, school closures are viewed as bad news. But with savvy stewardship, it’s possible for Shuldiner to turn this process into a much-needed win for SPS. For instance, on the question of how vacated buildings might be used going forward.

Presently, the district allows more than 60 outside organizations — including the Seattle Preschool Program — to occupy its buildings, rent-free. At the same time, SPS is paying $183,750 in rent to the city each year to house The Center School at Seattle Center.

A lopsided relationship, at the very least.

Again, zing! And I applaud this thinking because I have said this over and over. Why are we paying the City for space at Seattle Center but they get all the pre-K space in Seattle schools for free?

But then they say this:

Board members say they have no intention of selling off SPS properties. But that discussion shouldn’t be entirely off the table. Couldn’t central office staff move into some of those empty buildings, freeing the district to sell its John Stanford Center in Sodo?

The headquarters DID used to be in scattered buildings (mostly around Queen Anne). It was just ridiculous. Yes, the district might examine how much the JSCEE is costing the district to run as part of their look at building costs. But one reason to close these school buildings IS their poor condition.