Where's the transparency Mayor?

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/2016/03/24/5a775a54-f1dd-11e5-89c3-a647fcce95e0_story.html

"Work on some schools would be accelerated under this plan, and work on others could be delayed. Officials declined to provide a list of affected schools."

I want to see the list of planned renovations and the order. And the poor 5 schools that are not included to be renovated.

And don't tell me to write to the Mayor's office. I've written several times about other things in the city and have never once received a response.

[Anonymous]

You could, you know, read the budget. It's all online.

http://cfo.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocfo/publication/attachments/DC%20GOVT%20FY%202017Budget%20-%20Volume-5_part1.pdf

[Anonymous]

(And the second half): http://cfo.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocfo/publication/attachments/DC%20GOVT%20FY%202017Budget%20-%20Volume-5_part2.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/2016/03/24/5a775a54-f1dd-11e5-89c3-a647fcce95e0_story.html

"Work on some schools would be accelerated under this plan, and work on others could be delayed. Officials declined to provide a list of affected schools."

I want to see the list of planned renovations and the order. And the poor 5 schools that are not included to be renovated.

And don't tell me to write to the Mayor's office. I've written several times about other things in the city and have never once received a response.

You can see the list of planned renovations here: http://cfo.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/ocfo/publication/attachments/DC GOVT FY 2017Budget - Volume-5_part2.pdf
Those pages tell you where the money is going each year.

The DCPS Chief Operating Officer put together a list prioritizing the schools: https://docs.google.com/a/dc.gov/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGMuZ292fGRjcHMtc2Nob29sLW1vZGVybml6YXRpb25zfGd4OjIyYjljMGY4OGNlOTViNTQ
The schools that consistently ranked as most deserving have NOT been the ones to receive the increased funding.

[Anonymous]

Thank you.

I guess I didn't look hard enough.

As I suspected, it appears our school is one of the ones that got shafted. And although we will have been parents at the school for 12 years by the time my youngest finishes, the school will not be done by then, but my youngest will get to spend 5 years in a school under construction. What a joke. But what else is new, we're just collateral damage anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anyone care to share in distilled form for those of use whose computers don't seem to be able to handle the size of those files?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank you.

I guess I didn't look hard enough.

As I suspected, it appears our school is one of the ones that got shafted. And although we will have been parents at the school for 12 years by the time my youngest finishes, the school will not be done by then, but my youngest will get to spend 5 years in a school under construction. What a joke. But what else is new, we're just collateral damage anyway.

Us too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone care to share in distilled form for those of use whose computers don't seem to be able to handle the size of those files?

I'm the OP and don't find it user friendly. You have to search for each school you are interested in and then look to see where the dollars are allocated and what years they are allocated to, then look to see the planning year vs. construction years, etc. There doesn't appear to be an overall list, in order, of when the renovations will begin and when they will be completed.

The Google Docs ranking just seems to rank 18 schools (perhaps the ones that hadn't been included or decided on to be renovated?) in order of need based on various factors.

From that it appears Adams, Logan/Capitol Hill Montessori, Washington Metro, Malcolm X, and Browne are not in the improvement plan at all (so the 5 schools they have no plans to renovate by 2022) and then there are at least 3 (SWS, SWW and Eaton) where they won't even start the planning phase until FY 22, but seem to still be calling that "renovated by FY 22" in the articles that have come out, which is total crap. Planning phase does not equal renovated by FY 22.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you.

I guess I didn't look hard enough.

As I suspected, it appears our school is one of the ones that got shafted. And although we will have been parents at the school for 12 years by the time my youngest finishes, the school will not be done by then, but my youngest will get to spend 5 years in a school under construction. What a joke. But what else is new, we're just collateral damage anyway.

Us too.

And it also looks like we could get the added fun of swinging to Meyer Elementary for 5 years. I mean, that's virtually my youngest's entire elementary career. We currently walk 4 blocks to school. A school 3 miles away? That sucks. I wonder if they would temporarily give us back our proximity preference for Hearst since our assigned school would then be greater than a half mile and we are less than a half mile from Hearst....

[Anonymous]

My computer isn't liking those files. What's the word on Eaton?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My computer isn't liking those files. What's the word on Eaton?

Planning starts in FY 21. Construction starts FY 22. Construction complete in FY 26. Though the ranking document says planning in FY 22. Swing space potentially at Meyers, though no indication of how long that would be or if it would be the whole construction time or just part of the time. The renovations proposed seem minimal - only $15m total compared to all the other schools getting $30m and way on up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone care to share in distilled form for those of use whose computers don't seem to be able to handle the size of those files?

I'm the OP and don't find it user friendly. You have to search for each school you are interested in and then look to see where the dollars are allocated and what years they are allocated to, then look to see the planning year vs. construction years, etc. There doesn't appear to be an overall list, in order, of when the renovations will begin and when they will be completed.

The Google Docs ranking just seems to rank 18 schools (perhaps the ones that hadn't been included or decided on to be renovated?) in order of need based on various factors.

From that it appears Adams, Logan/Capitol Hill Montessori, Washington Metro, Malcolm X, and Browne are not in the improvement plan at all (so the 5 schools they have no plans to renovate by 2022) and then there are at least 3 (SWS, SWW and Eaton) where they won't even start the planning phase until FY 22, but seem to still be calling that "renovated by FY 22" in the articles that have come out, which is total crap. Planning phase does not equal renovated by FY 22.

Of course you don't find it user friendly. User friendly = transparent, so it'd be easier for you and I to call them on their BS. If they make it seem like it's transparent, then they can continue on with the same old BS they've been feeding us for years.

[Anonymous]

Call me naive but it does make some sense that it is more expensive to do all/most of the renovation in the summer. I find some merit to trying to keep rush fees/overtime down by moving students off site. It would also reduce the cost of erecting so many trailer campuses.

[Anonymous]

I would be interested to see the city make 2 or 3 elementary schools standard swing space. That the default plan for all schools is that the school is bussed to the swing space.

This way they are able to not worry about the costs of trailers etc.

It feels like every renovation is a new thing they need to figure out. It should not have to be that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Call me naive but it does make some sense that it is more expensive to do all/most of the renovation in the summer. I find some merit to trying to keep rush fees/overtime down by moving students off site. It would also reduce the cost of erecting so many trailer campuses.

I don't necessarily disagree, but only if it actually speeds up overall renovation. Seems ridiculous that Eaton would have to move off site for a multiphase renovation that is somehow going to take 5 years but only cost $15m? Frankly that seems like window dressing compared to what other schools are getting, plus an extremely elongated time frame for paltry renovations and a move to swing space? Makes no sense.