This blog has been created to serve as a community forum where the Tangletown residents and neighbors can share their thoughts and ideas regarding the proposed Minneapolis Public School changes. It is not affiliated with any specific organization.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Please use the comment option
For now, please share your thoughts and ideas by commenting. Stay tuned, there will be a more interactive system available soon through a forum site.
I understand that the district is considering many options with respect to the proposed school changes, several that could potentially impact Burroughs' boundaries and Tangletown specifically.
One of the main issues confronting the SW area is the issue of the open area (Kingfield/East Harriet) and whether or not to physically move Barton Open to put a community school in that neighborhood. As part of that whole discussion, I have heard of several alternative proposals that would involve removing Tangletown from the Burroughs' zone and putting it into the zone of a newly created community school (either at Ramsey...or I have also heard the idea of a Lyndale/Ramsey split). I have no idea how seriously the district is considering these proposals, but they are on the table and other interested parties are advocating for them. I think we, as Tangletown residents, need to think about what is being proposed and let the district and the school board know how we feel.
I drafted a letter to the school board w/ my opinions and I will share my basic thoughts on this blog to get the discussion started. (I am no expert in this area and am open to other ideas....)
1. Tangletown should remain in the Burroughs district: Tangletown residents have invested time, money and energy into their school and, up until a few weeks ago, assumed that there would be continuity going forward for current students and younger siblings. Tangletown should NOT be rezoned, particularly because none of the proposed changes that would involve Tangletown are compelling in terms of district goals or are reasonable logistically. (see below)
2. Grandfathering: Should changes occur, the district should grandfather current students and siblings. [Note: From what I have heard, the school board is considering only limited grandfathering that would not include lower grades or younger siblings.]
3. Idea for a New Community School: Use the existing Clara Barton building for a new community school to serve the open area and relocate Barton Open to a more central location (consistent w/ the district's goal). I know this is controversial, but after much thought, it seems to me that this is the most reasonable solution. While it certainly would be disruptive to Barton Open, they would at least be able to continue with their program, students, and staff (albeit at a different location).
If Barton Open remains as is, there would be far more disruption to SW boundaries and would require many more students to swith schools. For example, some people are promoting converting Ramsey into a community school. However, Ramsey is a magnet that serves nearly 1000 (right?) students. Abolishing that program would require all of those students to find new schools (presumably spread accross the city). In addition, the opening of Ramsey as a community school would require the redrawing of many SW school boundaries (including Tangletown) to fill the school, so all of those students would be disrupted as well. Moreover, the location of Ramsey as a community school is simply not sensible. It is not in the open area and it is less than 1 mile away from Burroughs (and on the same street). It would make zoning to populate those schools difficult.
4. If Ramsey is converted into a community school, I feel strongly that it should not remain as a Fine Arts school and the neighborhood would need some very specific assurances that the program there would be tailored to fit the needs of the community. The ultimate success of failure of a newly created school will depend largely on the support of the community.
Sorry this is so long. These are my opinions and are meant only to start a discussion on the topic. I have sent all of these opinions to the district (via their website) and the school board.
I am going to do some research/reading and I will be commenting soon. Nice Job Kristen on getting this started. I love community organization. To be continued.
Here's my question: I understand that Mpls spents $33-34M/year on busing, but I've heard that much of this is reimbursed by the state or earmarked from the funding. Is this right? I just looked online at the 2008 report the Mpls School Board has to do and strangely, transportation is never broken out as a separate cost, but it appears that much of the state funding is unrestricted.
Does anyone know the details of this?
Lisa - could you also say more on the Lyndale/Ramsey split you've heard about? Where's Lyndale?
The idea was raised by a parent on the open-area website. As I said, I have no if this is a serious consideration. I only know that the district has told us "everything is on the table" and I am sure that other people are floating ideas (including this one) to the district. If you look through the open area website, they have a fair amount of discussion on Lyndale school, which is somewhere in the area of 34th St. just north of the open area (I believe).
I am an open area parent and an active member of the NING forum. Let me reassure you that the Ramsey, Lyndale rezone tangletown is just us insanely worried parents trying to play out scenarios using numbers and buildings. This is NOT from the District. And now we hear that Ramsey will probably be preserved as a magnet. It's looking more like Lyndale for us!
The one area I continue to be baffled by is understanding what is the districts real objective?
When this was first presented / surfaced a little over a month ago - it was 'pitched' under saving money. There was tremendous expense and INefficiencies with a complex busing system - driving the need to simplify choice and free up more monies to be applied to the classroom.
This made a ton of sense until the big unveiling of the "money saved" from uprooting up to 35% of the districts students from their existing schools was - with the most lucrative scenario of Option C -- a whopping $1.7MM - a mere 0.3% of the entire budget.
After the recognition / acknowledgement that there actually wasnt that much expense to be saved from redrawn boundaries and shorter bus lines - the pitch seemed to shift.
For the district, this was actually (or also?) about creating more diversity and equity across all MSP schools, rather than polarity with VERY high performing schools (and typically not as diverse) and very low performing schools. Again, a noble objective that would clearly require significant changes in boundaries or busing.
My question is for the district - which objective is it? Do we really think Minneapolis is a heterogenous enough metropolitan area where diversity could be achieved without busing? Even Jackie Turner has described Minneapolis as a segregated city.
I feel if I had clarity on this I could direct my suggestions more appropriately. And if greater diversity is the real agenda- PLEASE MSP - be straight with us. Dont camoflouge this under budget issues.
I have been concerned that the most active and organizes communities would have their voices heard more than others groups that are perhaps less organized (although no less concerned) about their neighborhoods. I spoke with Jackie Turner this morning who is in charge of Student Placement with the District. There are 3 points from my conversation with Jackie that I would like to pass on:
1) The district isn't going to weight input from any one community or group of people of another. They are trying to keep the focus on the big picture. She said that when they receive emails/input/petitions they print them out and sort them according to the main ideas being put forth. One letter from one person is worth as much as a bunch of letters from a group of people saying the same thing.
2) If you have any specific ideas about what to do with the schools in the SW area, submit them to the district. They are still taking ideas and recommendations over the next 6 weeks. While voting on the big picture in 2 weeks, all the details have yet to be decided. So if you have a creative solution for Ramsey, Barton, Burroughs, etc., write to the board or the district!
3) There will most likely be task forces set up in the SW after the recommendations are presented on the 14th to the board. Once they pick the general direction at this meeting, the district is planning on coming out to our community and taking input from ALL the neighborhoods/school communities on what we want and how to best 'distribute' the kids/schools. Jackie suggested that maybe each school pick a few people to represent that school and be part of the task force. Anyone interested?
In light of everything, should we try to meet to brainstorm, organize, and get some key points that are a consistent message to the district and board. It is good to know that they aren't looking at the popularity of an idea now, but numbers may be important at a later time. The board members are elected officials. What do peoople think?
there hasn't seemed to be much media coverage of all of this. Have I missed something? A lot of parents I have talked to seem unaware of the change that is about to come in whatever final form it takes.
I pulled this of the Kingfield F2 website - a Southwest Journal reporter / resident received a press release from the district.
The board will now hear final recommendations from administration on April 28 instead of April 14. The vote was pushed back to May 26 from May 12.
This gives MPS time to schedule another round of community meetings in early May. They also announced a public hearing for the week of May 18 — a step that's required within two weeks of announcing school closings.
There is a meeting at Burroughs tonight at 6:30. We will be getting new information on how the proposed school changes might affect Burroughs and the surrounding communities. It is at 6:30. Please try to attend.
We have learned that the district is considering three specific scenarios for dealing with the F2 Open area. As I understand, these scenarios are:
1) send F2 to Lyndale 2) send 1/2 of F2 to Lyndale and 1/2 to Burroughs 3) send F2 to Burroughs and send a portion current Burroughs' families to Kenny.
Scenario 3 obviously would involve moving current Burroughs' families to a new school. I heard that they would do so by moving the southern boundary (which is now, I believe 54th) north to either the Creek or 50th. Families north of the new border would remain at Burroughs. Families south of the new border would go to Kenny.
Please plan on attending the meeting to hear about these scenarios and give input.
Where is everyone? What has happened to this blog? We need to get this going again! The school board are seriously considering making Ramsey Tangletown's community school. What do you all think of that? I know I bought my house here so my daughter would go to Burroughs, for no reason other than it's a great school. If I wanted her to go to Ramsey, I could have saved a lot of money and hassle and stayed in Kingfield! I think we have been very complacent in this CSO process, and I'm afraid that before we know it we will be expected to attend Ramsey. I understand that with time a new Ramsey could be great, but I'm not willing to risk my daughter's education on building a new school. Burroughs is great because of it's community support, I doubt a new Ramsey will get the same. I am starting to feel like we, Tangletown, are in the crosshairs, as well as Burroughs as a community. The F2 bloggers have been running an "if we have to go to Ramsey so does Tangletown" idea for a while now. Misery loves company, and since they're not getting Barton, they're pretty miserable. I don't know what we should do, but I think doing nothing hasn't worked so well. Tomorrow, Aug. 4, is the next school board meeting, plan D, and D1 are being discussed. Of course it is National Night out too, so it would be hard to attend the meeting. I just don't trust this school board at all.
Pam Costain pam.costain@mpls.k12.mn.us Carla Bates carla.bates@mpls.k12.mn.us Jill Davis jill.davis@mpls.k12.mn.us Lydia Lee lydia.lee@mpls.k12.mn.us Tom Madden tom.madden@mpls.k12.mn.us Chris Stewart chris.stewart@mpls.k12.mn.us T. Williams twilliams@mpls.k12.mn.us
I understand that the district is considering many options with respect to the proposed school changes, several that could potentially impact Burroughs' boundaries and Tangletown specifically.
ReplyDeleteOne of the main issues confronting the SW area is the issue of the open area (Kingfield/East Harriet) and whether or not to physically move Barton Open to put a community school in that neighborhood. As part of that whole discussion, I have heard of several alternative proposals that would involve removing Tangletown from the Burroughs' zone and putting it into the zone of a newly created community school (either at Ramsey...or I have also heard the idea of a Lyndale/Ramsey split). I have no idea how seriously the district is considering these proposals, but they are on the table and other interested parties are advocating for them. I think we, as Tangletown residents, need to think about what is being proposed and let the district and the school board know how we feel.
I drafted a letter to the school board w/ my opinions and I will share my basic thoughts on this blog to get the discussion started. (I am no expert in this area and am open to other ideas....)
1. Tangletown should remain in the Burroughs district: Tangletown residents have invested time, money and energy into their school and, up until a few weeks ago, assumed that there would be continuity going forward for current students and younger siblings. Tangletown should NOT be rezoned, particularly because none of the proposed changes that would involve Tangletown are compelling in terms of district goals or are reasonable logistically. (see below)
2. Grandfathering: Should changes occur, the district should grandfather current students and siblings. [Note: From what I have heard, the school board is considering only limited grandfathering that would not include lower grades or younger siblings.]
3. Idea for a New Community School: Use the existing Clara Barton building for a new community school to serve the open area and relocate Barton Open to a more central location (consistent w/ the district's goal). I know this is controversial, but after much thought, it seems to me that this is the most reasonable solution. While it certainly would be disruptive to Barton Open, they would at least be able to continue with their program, students, and staff (albeit at a different location).
If Barton Open remains as is, there would be far more disruption to SW boundaries and would require many more students to swith schools. For example, some people are promoting converting Ramsey into a community school. However, Ramsey is a magnet that serves nearly 1000 (right?) students. Abolishing that program would require all of those students to find new schools (presumably spread accross the city). In addition, the opening of Ramsey as a community school would require the redrawing of many SW school boundaries (including Tangletown) to fill the school, so all of those students would be disrupted as well. Moreover, the location of Ramsey as a community school is simply not sensible. It is not in the open area and it is less than 1 mile away from Burroughs (and on the same street). It would make zoning to populate those schools difficult.
4. If Ramsey is converted into a community school, I feel strongly that it should not remain as a Fine Arts school and the neighborhood would need some very specific assurances that the program there would be tailored to fit the needs of the community. The ultimate success of failure of a newly created school will depend largely on the support of the community.
Sorry this is so long. These are my opinions and are meant only to start a discussion on the topic. I have sent all of these opinions to the district (via their website) and the school board.
I am going to do some research/reading and I will be commenting soon. Nice Job Kristen on getting this started. I love community organization. To be continued.
ReplyDeleteFYI to everyone- The district website is accepting feedback only through tomorrow March 27.
ReplyDelete-Lisa
Here's my question: I understand that Mpls spents $33-34M/year on busing, but I've heard that much of this is reimbursed by the state or earmarked from the funding. Is this right? I just looked online at the 2008 report the Mpls School Board has to do and strangely, transportation is never broken out as a separate cost, but it appears that much of the state funding is unrestricted.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know the details of this?
Lisa - could you also say more on the Lyndale/Ramsey split you've heard about? Where's Lyndale?
(and thanks Kristin, for creating this!)
Kate- Here's a link on the idea of a Lyndale/Ramsey split.
ReplyDeletehttp://openarea.ning.com/profiles/blogs/idle-thought-pairing-lyndale
The idea was raised by a parent on the open-area website. As I said, I have no if this is a serious consideration. I only know that the district has told us "everything is on the table" and I am sure that other people are floating ideas (including this one) to the district. If you look through the open area website, they have a fair amount of discussion on Lyndale school, which is somewhere in the area of 34th St. just north of the open area (I believe).
Hope that helps.
-Lisa
I am an open area parent and an active member of the NING forum. Let me reassure you that the Ramsey, Lyndale rezone tangletown is just us insanely worried parents trying to play out scenarios using numbers and buildings. This is NOT from the District. And now we hear that Ramsey will probably be preserved as a magnet. It's looking more like Lyndale for us!
ReplyDeleteJane Onsrud
Lake Harriet Parent
The one area I continue to be baffled by is understanding what is the districts real objective?
ReplyDeleteWhen this was first presented / surfaced a little over a month ago - it was 'pitched' under saving money. There was tremendous expense and INefficiencies with a complex busing system - driving the need to simplify choice and free up more monies to be applied to the classroom.
This made a ton of sense until the big unveiling of the "money saved" from uprooting up to 35% of the districts students from their existing schools was - with the most lucrative scenario of Option C -- a whopping $1.7MM - a mere 0.3% of the entire budget.
After the recognition / acknowledgement that there actually wasnt that much expense to be saved from redrawn boundaries and shorter bus lines - the pitch seemed to shift.
For the district, this was actually (or also?) about creating more diversity and equity across all MSP schools, rather than polarity with VERY high performing schools (and typically not as diverse) and very low performing schools. Again, a noble objective that would clearly require significant changes in boundaries or busing.
My question is for the district - which objective is it? Do we really think Minneapolis is a heterogenous enough metropolitan area where diversity could be achieved without busing? Even Jackie Turner
has described Minneapolis as a segregated city.
I feel if I had clarity on this I could direct my suggestions more appropriately. And if greater diversity is the real agenda- PLEASE MSP - be straight with us. Dont camoflouge this under budget issues.
I have been concerned that the most active and organizes communities would have their voices heard more than others groups that are perhaps less organized (although no less concerned) about their neighborhoods. I spoke with Jackie Turner this morning who is in charge of Student Placement with the District. There are 3 points from my conversation with Jackie that I would like to pass on:
ReplyDelete1) The district isn't going to weight input from any one community or group of people of another. They are trying to keep the focus on the big picture. She said that when they receive emails/input/petitions they print them out and sort them according to the main ideas being put forth. One letter from one person is worth as much as a bunch of letters from a group of people saying the same thing.
2) If you have any specific ideas about what to do with the schools in the SW area, submit them to the district. They are still taking ideas and recommendations over the next 6 weeks. While voting on the big picture in 2 weeks, all the details have yet to be decided. So if you have a creative solution for Ramsey, Barton, Burroughs, etc., write to the board or the district!
3) There will most likely be task forces set up in the SW after the recommendations are presented on the 14th to the board. Once they pick the general direction at this meeting, the district is planning on coming out to our community and taking input from ALL the neighborhoods/school communities on what we want and how to best 'distribute' the kids/schools. Jackie suggested that maybe each school pick a few people to represent that school and be part of the task force. Anyone interested?
In light of everything, should we try to meet to brainstorm, organize, and get some key points that are a consistent message to the district and board. It is good to know that they aren't looking at the popularity of an idea now, but numbers may be important at a later time. The board members are elected officials. What do peoople think?
ReplyDeletethere hasn't seemed to be much media coverage of all of this. Have I missed something? A lot of parents I have talked to seem unaware of the change that is about to come in whatever final form it takes.
ReplyDeleteNEW TIMELINE!
ReplyDeleteI pulled this of the Kingfield F2 website - a Southwest Journal reporter / resident received a press release from the district.
The board will now hear final recommendations from administration on April 28 instead of April 14. The vote was pushed back to May 26 from May 12.
This gives MPS time to schedule another round of community meetings in early May. They also announced a public hearing for the week of May 18 — a step that's required within two weeks of announcing school closings.
There is a meeting at Burroughs tonight at 6:30. We will be getting new information on how the proposed school changes might affect Burroughs and the surrounding communities. It is at 6:30. Please try to attend.
ReplyDeleteWe have learned that the district is considering three specific scenarios for dealing with the F2 Open area. As I understand, these scenarios are:
1) send F2 to Lyndale
2) send 1/2 of F2 to Lyndale and 1/2 to Burroughs
3) send F2 to Burroughs and send a portion current Burroughs' families to Kenny.
Scenario 3 obviously would involve moving current Burroughs' families to a new school. I heard that they would do so by moving the southern boundary (which is now, I believe 54th) north to either the Creek or 50th. Families north of the new border would remain at Burroughs. Families south of the new border would go to Kenny.
Please plan on attending the meeting to hear about these scenarios and give input.
-Lisa Converse
Where is everyone? What has happened to this blog? We need to get this going again! The school board are seriously considering making Ramsey Tangletown's community school. What do you all think of that? I know I bought my house here so my daughter would go to Burroughs, for no reason other than it's a great school. If I wanted her to go to Ramsey, I could have saved a lot of money and hassle and stayed in Kingfield! I think we have been very complacent in this CSO process, and I'm afraid that before we know it we will be expected to attend Ramsey. I understand that with time a new Ramsey could be great, but I'm not willing to risk my daughter's education on building a new school. Burroughs is great because of it's community support, I doubt a new Ramsey will get the same. I am starting to feel like we, Tangletown, are in the crosshairs, as well as Burroughs as a community. The F2 bloggers have been running an "if we have to go to Ramsey so does Tangletown" idea for a while now. Misery loves company, and since they're not getting Barton, they're pretty miserable.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what we should do, but I think doing nothing hasn't worked so well. Tomorrow, Aug. 4, is the next school board meeting, plan D, and D1 are being discussed. Of course it is National Night out too, so it would be hard to attend the meeting. I just don't trust this school board at all.