Mayor Bowser Asks for School Funds Reprogramming

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

There are lots of needs. DCPS seems to pick randomly among them and then once they have invested enough, they drop them for the next. But there is never any planning that leads to completed goals. People are often saying that the problems are the fault of the parents who choose other schools, and that if the neighborhoods banded together, DCPS would serve them wonderfully. This just isn't true, and Garrison proves that.

Bingo. While there have been parts of what is necessary for a coherent plan, like a pretty good review of the existing conditions of buildings and plans for how to use them going forward, there has never been a rational process applied to the school improvements. An assessment of needs versus future uses, costs, etc, with a consistent formula laying out what work would be done by what criteria. It's just a constant political push-pull, and this is the latest example.

[Anonymous]

How is this possible? I am in shock.

The launch of a new $20 million dollar initiative, with a new high school, in the same week that this major redbudgeting request is going through to strip resources from high-priority schools like Murch. Clearly there needs to be more oversight at DCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor Garrison.

I really feel bad for them. Where are Garrison boosters? They seemed very hopeful on the renovations and the success of the school.

I never understood the Garrison folks. I went to one of the meetings as I live in the neighborhood and none of the vocal folks even had kids at Garrison. Made no sense.

They like the idea of neighborhood schools, and they have way too much faith in DCPS. But they love their own children too much to make them pawns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of crap is why I only put in for charters even under the old system where there were six dedicated DCPS spots. DCPS just can't be trusted.

This is a bad reason to opt for charters.

I didn't opt for just any charter, and location was not my highest priority. I had seen several DCPS flip flops in our inbound school in the years I paid attention prior to entering and they just continue. Someone should chart out how many broken promises have emerged out of just the past ten years. There is no plan. None. So nothing ever actually happens that leads to actualized improvement. I voted for Catania because I thought he had a plan. I was scared about Bowser, but still hopeful. The announcements of the last couple days have just proven that we have at least four more years without a DCPS system of planning followed by actualization of those plans. I had hoped otherwise. But right now it is looking like there will be no decent plans in place before my child is in middle school. I hope I a Am wrong and my pessimism is misplaced, but either way, I am very happy I put my eggs in a charter basket.

I think your pessimism is misplaced. This reprogramming request started under Gray, was retracted, and is now being put forward again. It seems to me that DCPS is driving it, not necessarily the mayor.

I say that as a (former?) Catania supporter and someone on the losing end of this funding shift.

Agree with this sentiment. While I am not defending Bowser, this is clearly an early, if not pre-administration conversation that probably began "we have an issue that we need to speak with you about that we feel requires immediately attention.... She clearly inherited this mess and was likely left with no choice regarding how to act.

I agree as well.This is just a necessary action to deal with the mess that was left by the prior administation. DGS just ignored some schools for six months to slow things down. They were in over their heads and knew they needed money to cover other projects. Now the new Mayor has to deal with it. But I am not reading political decisions into this. The budget proposal will be far more telling about the Mayor's priorities.

[Anonymous]

Mary Cheh has earmarked $9.5 million in the capital budget to build a new rec center in Palisades. That money would probably be better spent on schools.

[Anonymous]

The rec center will be widely used by all age groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The rec center will be widely used by all age groups.

There is a rec center in the Palisades now and a beautiful new park. Meanwhile there is an elementary school in the Ward that has not been renovated since it was built in 1929, has 3 full grades in trailers, no cafeteria, no ADA accessibility, and a host of other issues comprimising safety and education. Unless more than 650 people of all ages are going to spend 7-8 hours every day in a new rec center in the Palisades, your argument seems weak.

[Anonymous]

Those funds come from different sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those funds come from different sources.

The funds will not come from different sources now that there is a projected deficit.

We have $100m to spend each year on education facilities through the capital budget, which is funded through structured bonds. That's one of the reasons the funds ARE finite and also that DC is required to obligate those funds on a FY schedule, which is why reprogramming happens when one project can be delayed and another has overruns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those funds come from different sources.

That's what "reprogramming" is for. Unless it's federal money designated for a specific purpose, or funded through a separate revenue generation vehicle (unlikely) it's the same pool of money appropriated for capital infrastructure. And since it's capital, not operating money, the majority of projects go beyond one year. It's all shady though because the system takes advantage of the fact that there is no real accountability so this uproar is a blip on their bureaucratic radar and a couple days of discomfort for the new mayor.

[Anonymous]

I would be worried at the schools that haven't started. Seems doubtful they would break ground in 2016 then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those funds come from different sources.

That's what "reprogramming" is for. Unless it's federal money designated for a specific purpose, or funded through a separate revenue generation vehicle (unlikely) it's the same pool of money appropriated for capital infrastructure. And since it's capital, not operating money, the majority of projects go beyond one year. It's all shady though because the system takes advantage of the fact that there is no real accountability so this uproar is a blip on their bureaucratic radar and a couple days of discomfort for the new mayor.

And to add on to this thought, this is why the soccer stadium was a big deal. You may recall that the deal that was struck in December was dependent upon "reshuffling" $37 million in unspecified capital projects. Well, now we know what they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor Garrison.

I really feel bad for them. Where are Garrison boosters? They seemed very hopeful on the renovations and the success of the school.

I never understood the Garrison folks. I went to one of the meetings as I live in the neighborhood and none of the vocal folks even had kids at Garrison. Made no sense.

They like the idea of neighborhood schools, and they have way too much faith in DCPS. But they love their own children too much to make them pawns.

Really? I live in bounds for Garrison and know a lot of families from the local playgrounds who have their kids at Garrison and most are happy with it (for preschool at least - I don't personally know people whose kids are older). I feel bad that the school is being passed over again- I don't understand the process enough to understand how they keep promising the renovation and then delaying. It definitely seems like DCPS does not care about turning that school around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poor Garrison.

I really feel bad for them. Where are Garrison boosters? They seemed very hopeful on the renovations and the success of the school.

I never understood the Garrison folks. I went to one of the meetings as I live in the neighborhood and none of the vocal folks even had kids at Garrison. Made no sense.

They like the idea of neighborhood schools, and they have way too much faith in DCPS. But they love their own children too much to make them pawns.

Really? I live in bounds for Garrison and know a lot of families from the local playgrounds who have their kids at Garrison and most are happy with it (for preschool at least - I don't personally know people whose kids are older). I feel bad that the school is being passed over again- I don't understand the process enough to understand how they keep promising the renovation and then delaying. It definitely seems like DCPS does not care about turning that school around.

Yes, this is exactly what I am talking about. There has been huge, vocal neighborhood support and buy-in in the early years for several years. The families enter and work hard to make it a strong school, like your friends are likely doing now. DCPS throws them a bone, they work harder, DCPS steals the bone, the kids get older, the parents realize DCPS is not going to create a better path for after early ed, the parents move their kids, new toddlers enter and the cycle repeats. The idea that neighborhood but-in turns the school around is patently false in DCPS. It is believed only by those who have small children and haven't watched the cycle repeat.

[Anonymous]

So much for "Deal for All"