THE HEAT IS ON!

Thanks to a very detailed, factual, citizen-submitted Situation Report outlining what precisely was achieved from last March's boundary decision, the fires are crackling once again under the school board.

"I feel the heat on me right now."

- school board member Caren Diedrich

The only question is, if Town of Bristol resident (and situation report author) John Welke saw so crystally clear that the actions taken by the board accomplished little--if not nothing, then why didn't the board? Why did it take a resident, instead of a board member, to raise this issue?

Mr. Welke's well-researched situation report identified the following problems resulting from the boundary decisions made last March:

• Only 17 Students of the District Office’s projected 53 students actually transferred from CH Bird to Westside.


• There was no significant reduction in F\R lunch percentages or balance in socio-economics at Westside as a result of the student movement from CH Bird to Westside.


• There was no significant space created at CHB to get below the schools capacity and create a long term solution to the schools attendance numbers and projected growth.


• The total number of “instructional classrooms” at CHB currently being used this school year has not been reduced.


• The District office, based on their policies and the lack of reasonable interpretation of their policies, forced younger siblings of "grandfathered" students to be separated even though there was room for them at CH Bird.


• The Free and Reduced (F&R) Lunch percentage increased at CH Bird School.


• The description of the affected area in the Town of Bristol is flawed.


• The affected area has created an island without what most people would consider a “neighborhood school”.


• Area developers report that new construction in Bristol Gardens has been slowed primarily due to the instability of the school boundaries and the lack of a true neighborhood school...NOT the economic slump that is currently occurring.


• Loss of public trust in the school district/school board and increased open- enrollments out of the school district

---

After hearing from a number of residents who supplemented Mr. Welke's facts with anecdotal evidence, the board unanimously approved the following motions:

1. Require the Policy and Education Committee to review Voluntary Placement and Extreme Circumstances policies and practices so that they are in line with the spirit of “Connectedness” and are sympathetic to student and family needs.

2. Convene a special school board work session to discuss approaches that might ensure a more permanent, successful resolution to overcrowding of particular schools.


Read the full text of Mr. Welke's Situation report in the Board package for 11-10-08.

District Policy DUM-B

Have you ever looked at the district Policy naming structure? Does it drive you to drink? OK, that's fodder for an entirely different blog post. We have other business to attend to.

On the verge of another school year, a number of parents have been struggling to make sense of the board's decision on boundaries and try to reconcile it with policies and goals related to connectedness. This is their story.

Bird Elementary has space available. There are at least 21 spaces out of 436 total. That is a fact.

4 parents applied to allow their younger child, sibling of their child (who was grandfathered to stay at Bird due to their entry into 5th grade). TWO (2) were approved. TWO (2) others were not. This is also a fact.

We can't place these TWO kids at Bird Elementary????
This reeks of retribution an inconsistency.

Parents were told they have to ask Alice Murphy who then told them Culver makes the decision and then Culver tells them the Board makes those decisions and then back to Culver who says his staff makes those decisions. Conceptually this is how everything works, and its also how the district sweeps things under the carpet. People with a legitimate concern (like the Cardinal Parents group who were appalled at the graduation fiasco and requested action) keep shopping for answers or a response and they keep getting shuttled to someone else. You'll notice that that issue withered on the vine over the summer...just how the district likes it.

One parent summed it up as follows:

"Each party tells the complainant to contact the other to resolve it and the other refers them back to the original person. Pretty soon the complainant gets so frustrated they drop the whole issue and "go away" just like the district wants them to."

Oh, the district will tell you that their hands are tied, because SAGE rules require mandatory class sizes not to exceed 15 students per class in grades K-3. Of course, the REST of the story...what they don't tell you is that:
(A) The district has exceeded SAGE limits in each of the last 3 years, and
(B) The Department of Public Instruction is either asleep at the switch on the issue or is incorporating it's own version of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

The bottom line (as is frequently the case with this district) is that they cite rules and policy when the rules and policies even remotely support their actions, but otherwise, it's Policies be Damned.

What was the hub, bub?

Is the boundary issue dead...or are the embers silently smoldering? During recent interviews for the heir to Jim Carrel's school board seat, board president David Stackhouse asked each candidate a question that wasn't on the prepared question list. Stackhouse asked of each,

"Is the boundary issue resolved?"

Logic would seem to dictate that it is in the board's best interest to keep the dead buried....so why did Stackhouse ask the question? Was he looking for another ally to rally the issue? Or was his intent to exclude from consideration any candidate that indicated the issue was not resolved?

Why were people affected by the decision so distraught? Certainly the board's way of coming to a decision had a lot to do with things, but the map also clearly points out the disconnection in a district that claims to place high value on "connectedness". Take a look at the island the board created (the purple region north of Egre road and west of Bird St). These students were leapfrogged over both Bird and Northside to be placed at Westside. Does this make sense? Shouldn't the primary rule for developing boundaries be to draw lines for any individual school to form a single polygon? Isn't THAT what facilitates development of "neighborhood" schools?

Now consider ...for a minute...just ONE alternate map (at right). Certainly, the numbers of students was not considered in creating this quick version, but logically, does it not make more sense?

This was never about allowing people to stay with a beloved school but rather about making a decision which makes no sense.

Download or view the full-size District elementary boundary maps.


......THIS?...................or THIS?

Boundary Issue back on the agenda!

The rumors were correct, and it was announced at Monday's meeting that the school board will put the controversial boundary issue back on the agenda for its May 12 meeting. President Stackhouse kept a good poker face and didn't give any indication of whether it would be merely to appease those that have lobbied hard...and convincingly...to re-consider the decision.

Will the board simply vote to reaffirm its earlier decision? Or will the boundaries be up for discussion again? Tune in May 12.