VNESS Growth Boundary Position As you know, we are quickly approaching the Board vote on November 20 relative to the Districts Growth Boundary Proposal. We realize that there have been numerous changes to the plan in a short period of time that have made it difficult for even the most informed to understand where we have landed. Though the District has not been able to successfully communicate their ultimate goal with this new plan, we understand the driving force behind the proposed changes to be the need to address capacity issues throughout the District i.e., overcrowding at many schools combined with the lack of new building inventory to accommodate our growing population of students. Hopefully, this email will provide some clarification. We understand how difficult change is for everyone. It is daunting and disruptive. However, change is clearly necessary in order to appropriately serve our students in an equitable fashion. In light of the inevitable need for change, what is it that we can all agree upon? We really encourage you to read this email in full to understand the big picture and the tough choices that need to be made for the whole. We also want to take this opportunity to reiterate the purpose of VNESS. VNESS is a grassroots group of SPS parents whose goal is to educate and engage NE families in advocating for the greater good of all SPS students. As a group, we are focused on what benefits the greatest number of students while disrupting the fewest number of students. Our core group firmly believes that we need to engage in the beginning of processes such as this to understand the region as a whole and advocate for the best decisions in the interest of the whole. We understand that there are many populations that are affected by the proposed changes, and we also believe that everyone needs to be willing to bend for the greater good. We cant all have what we want, so what are we willing to live with? Please understand that, while we very much appreciate the issues facing individual schools, we are advocating for what we believe is truly in the best interest of the whole. You may not agree with us on every issue, but we truly hope we can begin to work together for the good of the NE region. With regard to the latest Growth Boundary Proposal, twenty-one amendments were introduced at the SPS board work session earlier this week. We would suggest that this large number of amendments indicates a fairly flawed plan across the District. Ideally, we would prefer to see the Board vote this latest revision down and send it back to the District to work harder to make the best decisions for our students with appropriate community feedback. Unfortunately, we do not believe that the Board will do nothing on November 20 and put the onus back on the District to make further revisions. There are several amendments that have been put forth by various Directors that impact the NE. Please understand that these amendments are still works in progress. In fact, an amendment can be introduced up until the Board votes on November 20. We have provided a link to the list of amendments introduced at the Board work session earlier this week, but these amendments are not written in stone. We understand that some of these amendments have been removed, but we have yet to see the final amendments. Based on the direction these amendments appear to be headed, our position is as follows. 1. Community Feedback •Wedgwood has made it clear that they would like to feed to Eckstein. •Olympic View has made it clear that they want to feed to JAMS. •APP has made it clear that they dont want to move into the NE neighborhood schools. 2. Eckstein Geo-Split •Even if we do not agree that Eckstein is currently overcrowded, we can see that it cannot sustain the projected growth. •How Eckstein is split is debatable. •Our position is that a geo-split for Eckstein (grades 6,7,8) to start a comprehensive, fully funded middle school at JAMS starting in 2014 is the best option. A geo-split means assigning kids to the school that they are to attend under the new Growth Boundaries plan. So, students that are currently attending Eckstein, but would be assigned to JAMS under the new plan would be moved from Eckstein to JAMS in 2014. There will be no grandfathering of students into their current school. •We also understand the concern for the fragile population of food-scarce students that would be moving from Eckstein to JAMS, and would advocate for replicating the Eckstein food program that serves these students at JAMS to continue necessary support. Mitigation funds for wrap-around services to support fragile students such as this are necessary. •If you grandfather students into Eckstein, you do not provide necessary relief for Eckstein AND you do not have a healthy enough population of 7th and 8th graders to create a comprehensive middle school. If you grandfather students into Eckstein, you would need to open JAMS with a 6th grade roll-up. This means that JAMS would have 6th grade only in 2014, 6th & 7th grades in 2015, and 6-8th grades in 2016. With a 6th grade roll-up, you would not have proper middle school funding and programming, thus you could not offer equitable middle schools to NE families. We do not believe there is consensus around a 6th grade roll-up. •By moving students to their new assignment school, you provide relief to Eckstein AND open JAMS as a comprehensive middle school. While we realize that this is a difficult decision, we believe it is a necessary component of the plan to positively impact the greatest number of students while disrupting the fewest. We need to support Eckstein AND JAMS in providing equitable NE middle schools. •Harium Martin-Morris and Michael DeBell have introduced an amendment that currently reflects what is outlined above relative to Eckstein and JAMS. We will post their amendment as soon as it is finalized. 3. Middle School Feeder Patterns vs. Geographic Boundary Lines •We believe that we need to revisit the idea of implementing geographic boundaries for middle schools. •Long-term, the District will be unable to maintain feeder patterns and effectively respond to capacity issues. •Feeder patterns necessitate continuous changes to respond to capacity fluctuations that actually make student pathways less predictable. •However, we understand that the District is unable to make this change by November 20. •In light of the system of feeder patterns in place, we feel that the following patterns are most sound: •Feeder schools and programs assigned to JAMS to include: John Rogers, Sacajawea, Olympic Hills, Olympic View, Cedar Park and all APP students in the Eckstein/JAMS reference areas •Feeder schools assigned to Eckstein to include: Wedgwood, Laurelhurst, Bryant, View Ridge and Sand Point •We continue to maintain that APP should not be moved back into NE neighborhood schools. We still believe that the best option would be to leave APP middle school at Hamilton using the South annex at Lincoln. However, it does not appear that any of the amendments support this. •If leaving APP at Hamilton is truly not an option, then these feeder patterns take into consideration the protection and fluctuation of APP students in the NE by guaranteeing at least 3 classes per grade with the flexibility to change APP feeder school pathways prior to open enrollment if necessary to address overcrowding. •To be clear, these pathways mean a geo-split for Hamilton APP. APP students in the JAMS/Eckstein service area will be assigned to JAMS in 2014. They will not be grandfathered into Hamilton. •Again, this is NOT anyones ideal solution and many families will be impacted with a change. But, because our understanding is that the board will NOT go with a do nothing vote, we feel these are the best pathways. •Harium Martin-Morris and Michael DeBell have introduced an amendment that currently reflects most, but not all of what is outlined above regarding feeder school assignments for middle school. Namely, Olympic View is currently feeding to Wilson-Pacific. In this situation, they would be the only Wilson-Pacific feeder school to attend high school at Nathan Hale. All other Wilson-Pacific students would move on to Ballard or Ingraham. We understand that their preference would be to have Olympic View feed to JAMS, where they could move to high school at Hale with their neighborhood cohort. •Sherry Carr has introduced an amendment that would currently feed Olympic View to JAMS as they have requested. •We will post their amendments as soon as they are finalized. 4. Elementary APP •Again, APP has made it clear that they do not want to move into NE neighborhood schools. •Sharon Peaslee has introduced an amendment that currently splits north end APP elementary students between three sites - Thornton Creek, Olympic Hills and Wilson Pacific. •This APP pathway provides guaranteed seats for students and Thornton Creek is an option school, so it is conceivable that APP could take over the Thornton Creek location. •However, Superintendent Banda has already assigned APP elementary to Wilson-Pacific where seats are not needed for neighborhood students. •Our position is that elementary APP is best served by remaining at Lincoln until Wilson-Pacific opens in 2017, at which point they would move as a cohort to Wilson-Pacific. Please feel free to email us with any questions. We will do our best to respond to them if we are able. Even for many of us who have followed this issue closely from the beginning, it can be difficult to understand all of the nuances. Links to amendment and maps introduced at the Board work session earlier this week: seattleschools.org/modules/groups/homepagefiles/cms/1583136/File/Departmental%20Content/enrollment%20planning/Nov%206%20GB%20Web/Amendments%20Chart%20by%20topics.pdf?sessionid=1fd657ffc52584ba3b3b3a04bc8bec67 seattleschools.org/modules/groups/homepagefiles/cms/1583136/File/Departmental%20Content/enrollment%20planning/Nov%206%20GB%20Web/MSAlternatives111313%20(2).pdf?sessionid=1fd657ffc52584ba3b3b3a04bc8bec67 Alli Sweet & Monica Mace VNESS Co-Chairs
Posted on: Sat, 16 Nov 2013 01:29:37 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015