Seattle Schools Community Forum

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.

Update :  there is finally a staff document about the amendments.  It is terse and I don't have a link but here are their main points on the amendments. There are not comments for all amendments.

Kudos to Director Burke for attempting to take on the issue of the reopening of Lincoln High School in 2019.  The estimate of how many parents packed the library was about 300 people.  Staff included Flip Herndon, Michael Tolley as well as Hale principal Jill Hudson (who is on the 24-credit committee as well as being the planning principal for Lincoln.)  She was the only staff member to speak. Burke outlined the goals of the meeting:

I do want to put forth an accounting of the Board meeting last Wednesday, the 12th, but the MOST important thing is to tell parents to get your feelings/thoughts/ideas/amendments into the Board as soon as possible. My take from public testimony is that there are a couple of big concerns: - grandfathering (many, many calls for this to be expanded) - uncertain pathways to middle school - boundary changes that affect too many schools and their communities I cannot urge you enought to collaborate with other parents/schools and get those thoughts to the Board ASAP. Either: spsdirectors@seattleschools.org (for just the Board) or schoolboard@seattleschools.org (includes senior management) Here's what was said during the Board meeting on this topic.

From the agenda for the Board meeting on Wednesday night, three items of major interest.

Below is a letter from the North District council (" representing the North Seattle neighborhoods of Meadowbrook, Pinehurst, Maple Leaf, Cedar Park, Olympic Hills, Jackson Park, North Matthews Beach, Lake City, Victory Heights and Northgate") to the Board and cc'd to Superintendent Nyland and City Council member, Debora Juarez expressing concern over Cedar Park's opening and its possible ripple effects for the region. I am also learning that there are parents gathering information about growth boundaries, possibly to challenge the district legally.  I am not surprised at any of this given the gravity of the situation, both district-wide and for specific regions.

Two interesting items about growth and boundaries from readers.

Today is the Operations committee meeting where they will be discussing proposed boundary changes. The Committee will then take a vote on whether to move them forward to the full Board for approval. Agenda .

FAQ: Growth Boundaries This on high schools: We will begin discussions of high school boundaries in 2018. No additional high school capacity will be added until the renovation of the Lincoln Building is complete. The estimated date for Lincoln to open as a high school is 2019. High school attendance area boundaries will need adjustment in order to assign students to the renovated Lincoln High School when it opens. I'm wondering if they can really hold off discussion of this topic until 2018.

Personalities - I note that Nyland and Blanford were chatting before the meeting.  Nyland said something to Blanford and Blanford nodded and said, " Yes, let's get this nonsense over and get to work."   (No I wasn't eavesdropping; the room was fairly empty and Blanford's voice carried.)  Sorry that Blanford thinks that discussion over the selection of a superintendent is nonsense. Superintendent Comments

Monday, October 6th Growth Boundary meeting from 6:30-7:30 pm at Mercer Middle School Tuesday, October 7th  Community Meeting with Director McLaren from 6:00-745 pm at the West Seattle Branch Library Growth Boundary meeting from 6:30-7:30 pm at Rainier Beach High School Wednesday, October 8th Executive Committee meeting from 8:30-10:00 am.  Agenda .  Reading over the agenda, I find it exceeding vague/cryptic. There's an interesting notation on the agenda which is " items requiring Board Action on October 15 and/or Nov. 5th."   This stands out because at the Executive Ctm meetings, they normally go over major items on the agendas for upcoming Board meetings (and that is on the agenda for the Ctm meeting). So I wonder about this notation that perhaps there might be Intro/Action items on those two Board meeting agendas.  If so, what could be so urgent that it couldn't have been introduced last Wednesday?  I recall Director Carr saying (a coupl...

From the Superintendent: Dear Seattle Public Schools families and staff, As many of you know, the Seattle School Board on Nov. 20 approved boundary changes for the 2014-15 school year to help address our growing enrollment and to plan for three new middle schools. We have heard from several families -- especially from parents of 7th grade Hamilton International Middle School APP students and parents of Eckstein Middle School 7th graders – asking that their students stay at their current school next year, and not move to the new Jane Addams Middle School (JAMS). However, we will not be “grandfathering” – or guaranteeing a seat – for students who are currently in grade 6 or 7 at Hamilton and Eckstein. The new boundary changes mean these students will move to Jane Addams Middle School next fall.  I understand it is a lot to ask of our students to change schools in their last year of middle school. Please know that we do not take decisions like this lightly. ...

This SPS page has updated documents and a "look-up" tool for you to see, based on your address, what your child's schools will be.

That was fast (good job, SPS staff).  Here is the district's overview of the approved Growth Boundaries plan.  I don't think it answers all the questions you have but it is a good overview. From SPS Communications:

I have never asked the school district to do anything that they didn't promise to do. The fact that I have to ask them to do things so often is a testament to how rarely they do what they promise they will do. We hear - all the time - about how there is a division of authority with the Board focusing exclusively on policy and governance work while the administration and management decisions are delegated to the superintendent. If that were true, then the school assignment decisions should never have been subjected to a Board vote. Drawing attendance area boundaries is clearly an administrative or management decision - not a policy decision - and should have been delegated to the superintendent. Policy 3130 is nearly all that the Board should have to say about student assignment. One mistake leads to others. Putting it before the Board for a vote made it a political decision. The more political the decision, the less it is based on data and reason, the more it is influence...

Since Blogger doesn't work well on my iPad, I'll just do multiple posts.  It's now 3:54 p.m.  There are about 25 people outside the JSCEE to rally for the Indian Heritage program.  There is a petition to make Wilson-Pacific School a Seattle landmark (I'll see if it's on-line). There are already tv crews here.  (Thank you to everyone who volunteered to be interviewed.  Very helpful.) The auditorium is full of children from MLK, Jr. school who are going to be singing for the Board and assembled audience.  It's a nice thing to see so many beautiful faces ready to sing out.  (Note; they are taking up a lot of seats but they will be leaving after their performance so many seats will open up.  It does not appear that there is any extra seating so it is likely some people will be standing.) I see Martin O'Callahan, the principal of the World School, along with many supporters. It's a sober (and very nice looking - everyone is dressed up) Board th...

So the SCPTSA may want the Board to vote first for the Intermediate Plan and then vote down the Growth Boundaries but that may not work.  (It's possible if they adjusted the Intermediate Plan.) Here's the thing:  It feels like the Board and the staff could have cut up the Growth Boundaries plan, section by section, thrown the pieces in the air and picked 10 off the ground.  I honestly worry that somewhere in there is something that many will have overlooked and/or will not like.  I want to have faith but when the SCPTSA says the process wasn't good, it wasn't good.  When Kellie, Meg and others who really see the weeds AND the big picture and are worried, it isn't good.  When a program gets moved around before its review is finished, it's not good (that would be AL). When a school gets changed from a neighborhood school to an Option school without a single meeting of the school community, it's not good (that would be Dearborn Park). When parents cannot u...

This just came across my desk and, at this point, I agree.  The agenda is a mess (not to mention the Growth Boundaries plan.  There's now even some mystery motion to change the agenda (with no explanation of what).

It's a fairly light week but given the seriousness of the Board meeting on Wednesday, perhaps better that way. Wednesday, November 20 School Board meeting starting at 4:15 pm.  Agenda As I previously mentioned, this will be a long (and hard-fought) meeting to slog through.  I can't say for certain, one way or another, if the speaker list will run long again.  On the subject of the Growth Boundaries , I would say that, for the Directors, it is likely all over but the shouting.  However, there are other items - like the Special Ed Corrective Plan - that many parents will want to speak out on.  So even if the public testimony list is 20 people, I suspect there will be questions on the Special Ed issue and Pinehurst (both of which are right before the Growth Boundaries).  I don't think the Board will get to the Growth Boundaries before 6:30 p.m. What will happen is that the motion will be made to accept the Growth Boundaries.  From what I rec...

Here is the updated agenda for the Board meeting on Wednesday.   To sign up to speak, you must call (252-0040) or e-mail (boardagenda@seattleschools.org) at 8 am on Monday morning. To note: - changes were made to the Pinehurst Action Item .  Kudos to parent John Chapman who crunched the numbers and made the query to staff about comparing the costs per student at Pinehurst versus other K-8s.  It went from about $3,000 more per student down to $1350 more per student.  (And again, Pinehurst's underenrollment - some of which can be related to the district's multiple attempts to close it or ignore it during enrollment - is driving that per student cost up.) New recommendation includes possibly moving Pinehurst to Thornton Creek or JA K-8. - revisions to the Growth Boundaries Action Item.   I have not read through these changes thoroughly so I'll ask readers to let us know what they are (and possible implications).  Somehow there are 15 amendments...