Win-win solutions for Brent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where does EYA plan to construct all of these new Townhouses? Unless I am mistaken, all 323 units for Capotol Quarter have been completed. I can't wait to hear Catania and Wells try to seek crossing the CSX pit to residents. Mark my words, this is DOA.

I wouldn't be so sure. Wells and Kaya will probably get what they want - parents on the periphery of the Brent District won't be able to stop them, although they made be able to negotiate a few terms for a transition. The Capitol Riverfront developers want Van Ness to re-open no later than SY 2015-2016 for various reasons, and Kaya has committed to that time-frame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many sped kids are there at Tyler (in the autism and LD programs plus in inclusion but still requiring special supports)? I believe it's at least 100. Where would they go?

Where would they go in the event of what? They're not going anywhere, Tyler's programs and boundaries are not slated to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Articulate and regular Brent poster (who I think is a male, Hill staffer and whose first kid is about 3) .....

when are you going to get it through your head that you and your 60 affluent white neighbors are not going to effect structural change to suit your highly specific wants (not needs)?

You come on here about every two weeks publicly wringing your hands because your white 3 year old and 1 year old will have to attend school -- as it stands now -- with children of color whose parents did not get a Masters of Public Policy from U. of Michigan.

Your fear that you may not be able to customize a PUBLIC resource to your highly specific wishes is palpable. (Hey! What if we drew a line around my rowhouse and Dave's and Brandon's, and possibly a few other rowhouses on this block, but ONLY if the current owners sell before 2015, AND they sell to a white couple who both have grad degrees and Hill experience .. otherwise, just me and Dave and Brandon's kids should go to this tiny school that we'll create walking distance to our house with preference for both proximity AND HHI. ANd DCPS will pay for us to have this sweet, little separate school that must be kept below 13.6% FARMS at all time, and if that percentage creeps up above 14%, then DCPS should revisit boundaries to lop off those 3 rental rowhouses where the single moms lives so their children can't be in the same building as my Acclerated Learners (who are 2 and 3, mind you, but then again, I have a Masters from U. MIchigan and work for the Senate Committee on Nonsense, did I mention that? So I'm pretty sure my white 2 year old will in fact be an Accelerated Learner.

Anyway, do you guys have any thoughts on how my three neighbors with JDs and I can get our own little sweet school on the taxpayers dime, while redlining out the black kids?

+1

And, I'd like to buy the PP a round.

I'm the OP, and I actually thought the post above was pretty funny and not without merit although not entirely just in its portrayal. It was a proposal that accepted the existing diversity in the Brent-Tyler catchments. And it does seem that substantial changes can be effected by groups of parents (SWS is a separate PS-5 school now, no?), but it requires political feasibility and community support which any sort of cluster with Tyler obviously doesn't/wouldn't ever have. I wasn't aware of the Van Ness specifics and found them very interesting. Redistricting will be fascinating in a morbid/rubbernecking sort of way. Hopefully, there will be time for community input and creative thinking before things are finalized. Thanks for the input, folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who exactly would this "many IB" on whose behalf you or the "working group" purporting to speak? Do you even have a child currently attending Brent?

A school boundaries working group of rising parents has been formed with the blessing of Principal Young.

The first meeting is in the Brent library tomorrow (Thurs) evening at 6:30.

The meeting announcement has been made via a list serv with 80 names, including almost the entire PreS3 and PreK4 wait lists, and at Monday night's meeting about early childhood programs/Reggio Emilia at Brent.

The rest of the school community is free to participate. There will be announcements in Brent's newsletters soon.

It seems you unintentionally answered my second question about having a child who attends Brent. Brent parents will be participating in International Night tomorrow at the school. As to my first question, the fact that you set up a listserve does not translate to speaking on behalf of any Brent parents.

[Anonymous]

Yes, it might be worth rescheduling and announcing the meeting over the listserve for current Brent parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where does EYA plan to construct all of these new Townhouses? Unless I am mistaken, all 323 units for Capotol Quarter have been completed. I can't wait to hear Catania and Wells try to seek crossing the CSX pit to residents. Mark my words, this is DOA.

I wouldn't be so sure. Wells and Kaya will probably get what they want - parents on the periphery of the Brent District won't be able to stop them, although they made be able to negotiate a few terms for a transition. The Capitol Riverfront developers want Van Ness to re-open no later than SY 2015-2016 for various reasons, and Kaya has committed to that time-frame.

I know that Henderson has committed to re-opening Van Ness, but it's still hard to imagine that will be politically feasible. Henderson has just finished another round of school closings and is going to follow it up by opening another school? Van Ness shares boundaries with a newly-renovated and largely out of bounds Tyler. I'm not aware of the specifics of Amidon, but I'm guessing it isn't at capacity either.

EYA has sold all their townhouses. There is more development in the pipeline but all in the form of condos or apartments which are likely less appealing to families.

And finally, the timeline seems ambitious. Van Ness has been shuttered for a few years now; I imagine that re-opening is going to take many many months. There's no existing school administration or established school community to push DCPS forward. I always thought that the best hope for Van Ness would have been SWS, but apparently DCPS didn't agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Might be worth remembering that politicis is the art of the possible on this thread. Organizers of the Brent school boundaries working group have already spoken to DC City Council Committee on Education members about which boundaries may change, and the Brent-Tyler boundary, and relationship, are not on the table. This is because DCPS considers Tyler under-enrolled IB, like Watkins, and under-enrolled schools won't have their boundaries enlarged. Moreover, DCPS very rarely allows parents to choose between two IB schools.

What is being considered is drawing the Van Ness school boundaries to include the southern zone of the Brent District, killing two birds with one stone in DCPS' eyes by furnishing enough IB kids to seed the school for SY 2015-2016 and heading off over-crowding at Brent. DCPS is under increasing pressure from the big Capitol Hill Riverfront developers, particularly EYA (builder of the Capitol Quarter townhouses) to provide them with a school so they'll build more townhouses. Great, Brent District kids served up to keep developers happy. Many IB would much rather see Brent drop PreS3 in the medium-term, or even a classroom trailer or two on the small grounds.

Unless Wells and Kaya go are out of the picture politically within 18 months, nobody should be surprised if the Van Ness District includes a swathe of Brent's...

Is this a typo? Why wouldn't under-enrolled schools have their boundaries enlarged? Wouldn't that help their under-enrollment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it might be worth rescheduling and announcing the meeting over the listserve for current Brent parents.

You are assuming that the parents of waitlisted three-year olds actually care about listening to the views of current Brent parents or welcome their input. Really no different from CHPSPO claiming that they speak on behalf of Brent parents. Where are the flyers for this meeting? Was notice of this meeting posted on brentneighbors listserve? Was this meeting mentioned in Principal Young's robocall on Monday? Was there any mention in TuesNews? Unfortunately, they know next to nothing about the challenges that need to be addressed over text few years (have they attended an LSAT meeting?), but want to try to convince DCPS that parents are clamoring for trailers and other silliness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it might be worth rescheduling and announcing the meeting over the listserve for current Brent parents.

Nobody IB will be excluded from the activities of the working group, which will meet regularly at least until the end of the year.

A small number of rising IB parents will meet tomorrow to discuss how to get more information about the DCPS boundary review from the powers that be. Parents will also discuss how to create a structure enabling all IB parents, and OOB with sibling, to provide input on the DCPS boundary review to the Brent LSAT, DCPS and the DC City Council. No input will be solicited, or provided, before the early fall.

Brent parents with kids already in the school emailed [e-mail], the email address on the green fliers that went up last month, and/or came to the boundaries meeting at Brent on April 11th. Others are free to get on the listserv the same way.

[Anonymous]

Some of the comments on Tyler are really off base. Yes it has OOB population largely attracted to SI. It also draws heavily from north of PA and East Cap Hill, where proximity provides a ticket into a sought after PS3 program. Its OOB draw is an asset not a hindrance. The western edge of the Tyler boundary touches covers a Barracks Row area that is less residentially dense than other parts of the Hill, between the freeway and area to the south, the Marine Barracks, and the large Tyler footprint. PG and Hopkins are IB for Tyler

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Is this a typo? Why wouldn't under-enrolled schools have their boundaries enlarged? Wouldn't that help their under-enrollment?

Not a typo. This is the way DCPS thinks and plans. It does seem somewhat counter intuitive.

The most frustrating thing about considering solutions for Brent is that DCPS is clearly not moving in the direction of long-overdue, and smart, systemic changes to Hill feeder patterns, but rather in the direction of the odd tweak to ES districts. Any one group of parents or LSAT reps obviously can't address the planning deficit.

I'd like to see a lot of changes, including LT closing, SWS with it's own district, Tyler Traditional closing and SI taking over and giving proximity to the entire Hill, Payne and Miner becoming KIPP schools, Van Ness opening tomorrow with proximity much greater than 1500 feet. No point in thinking about any of it.

[Anonymous]

What is being considered is drawing the Van Ness school boundaries to include the southern zone of the Brent District, killing two birds with one stone in DCPS' eyes by furnishing enough IB kids to seed the school for SY 2015-2016 and heading off over-crowding at Brent. DCPS is under increasing pressure from the big Capitol Hill Riverfront developers, particularly EYA (builder of the Capitol Quarter townhouses) to provide them with a school so they'll build more townhouses.

I could see Wells rolling over and doing nothing, as usual, but why would he "want" or advocate for this result? In other words, what would someone thinking about running for Mayor achieve by inviting a bare knuckles fight over redistricting? Neither Mr. Livable/Walkable nor Kaya will be able to defend forcing parents to cross under the Freeway at Fourth or Sixth Streets, plus negotiating six lanes of Virginia Avenue.

Has anyone taken a census of families living in CQ and the "southern zone" of the Brent district, whatever that means in order to determine where potential boundaries could be drawn? E Street is too close to Brent to defend, while South Carolina or F Street probably would yield far too few students if the real goal is to "feed" VanNess. How does the Hine development fit into the picture? What does ANC 6B and affected SMD reps have to say about all of this? More importantly, what does Principal Young say about this, and what is his plan? Will he be attending tomorrow's meeting? I assume that the answer is "no," given International Night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it might be worth rescheduling and announcing the meeting over the listserve for current Brent parents.

You are assuming that the parents of waitlisted three-year olds actually care about listening to the views of current Brent parents or welcome their input. Really no different from CHPSPO claiming that they speak on behalf of Brent parents. Where are the flyers for this meeting? Was notice of this meeting posted on brentneighbors listserve? Was this meeting mentioned in Principal Young's robocall on Monday? Was there any mention in TuesNews?

IB parents on the PreS3 waiting list are getting organized because we're the ones likely to be cut out of Brent for K if boundaries change. At Lafayette, parents from PreK to the upper grades are organizing because their feed to Deal (and Wilson) is on the chopping block.

Nobody's assuming anything, or claiming to speak on behalf of anybody. These are baby steps organizationally. Principal Young thought a small initial organizational meeting might help but plans to work with rising parents to advertise subsequent working group meetings on TuesNews etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it might be worth rescheduling and announcing the meeting over the listserve for current Brent parents.

Nobody IB will be excluded from the activities of the working group, which will meet regularly at least until the end of the year.

A small number of rising IB parents will meet tomorrow to discuss how to get more information about the DCPS boundary review from the powers that be. Parents will also discuss how to create a structure enabling all IB parents, and OOB with sibling, to provide input on the DCPS boundary review to the Brent LSAT, DCPS and the DC City Council. No input will be solicited, or provided, before the early fall.

Brent parents with kids already in the school emailed [e-mail], the email address on the green fliers that went up last month, and/or came to the boundaries meeting at Brent on April 11th. Others are free to get on the listserv the same way.

So it seems that this courtesy cannot be extended. Many parents have jobs and other commitments and thus were not able to attend the April 11 meeting.

[Anonymous]

You do claim to speak on behalf of others by asserting that "[m]any IB would much rather see Brent drop PreS3 in the medium-term, or even a classroom trailer or two on the small grounds." Pretty sweeping statement if you ask me.