Murch- Getting screwed again?

[Anonymous]

The boundaries won't fix anything: the schools around Murch are Janney, Layfayette, and Hearst
Janney is overcrowded. The northern part of Murch was already rerouted to Lafayette -- which would be overcrowded if more of Murch is rerouted there. The southern part of Murch was already rerouted to Hearst - except for houses literally a five minute walk from Murch. The problem at Murch is that the historic preservation people won't let us change the original building too much, and NPS won't allow building on the part of the land it owns -- necessitating having part of the project underground. That is the part that DC now doesn't want to pay for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just don't understand why the Mayor can't find a way to make you guys at Murch whole and just build the school as originally planned. Does she want to lose Ward 3 again? Surely she's not going to run unopposed next time

Is it a Chris Christie Bridge situation - I.e., she's sticking it to the people who supported Catania"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The boundaries won't fix anything: the schools around Murch are Janney, Layfayette, and Hearst
Janney is overcrowded. The northern part of Murch was already rerouted to Lafayette -- which would be overcrowded if more of Murch is rerouted there. The southern part of Murch was already rerouted to Hearst - except for houses literally a five minute walk from Murch. The problem at Murch is that the historic preservation people won't let us change the original building too much, and NPS won't allow building on the part of the land it owns -- necessitating having part of the project underground. That is the part that DC now doesn't want to pay for.

Yes, can folks please stop harping the boundaries? The problem is that Ward 3 simply does not have enough elementary schools. There are no charters. There are lots of private schools but most IB folks can't afford those (yes, really), or simply believe in the social contract that calls for taxpayers to have decent neighborhood schools. If you're stuck on the specious issue of Murch boundaries, you simply don't understand the demographics and why that did not/would not have stemmed the swelling IB enrollments at Ward 3 schools.

Let's focus on the real issue here. DC sucks at planning. There is tremendous waste in the contracting process. While this most definitely needs to be fixed, the starting point should not be by building a mediocre, shoddy school simply to make a point that DC is somehow being fiscally responsible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The boundaries won't fix anything: the schools around Murch are Janney, Layfayette, and Hearst
Janney is overcrowded. The northern part of Murch was already rerouted to Lafayette -- which would be overcrowded if more of Murch is rerouted there. The southern part of Murch was already rerouted to Hearst - except for houses literally a five minute walk from Murch. The problem at Murch is that the historic preservation people won't let us change the original building too much, and NPS won't allow building on the part of the land it owns -- necessitating having part of the project underground. That is the part that DC now doesn't want to pay for.

Maybe the answer is simply to enforce the existing boundaries strictly. IIRC, there are about 150 OOB students there. Seems a simple answer is to refuse any new OOB students until the school gets down to its capacity number. Not fair to remove the OOB students already in the school, so just let them work through via attrition, which should take 3 years. Problem mostly solved in three years. If school is still overcapacity after 3 years, then consider boundary changes.

That doesn't solve the current cost and design problems with renovation though. Seems like DCPS may need to delay renovation by 3-6 months to sort those out. Or maybe there are parts that can begin now. Frankly, I don't think Murch is entitled to all the money; if the budget needs to be cut, so be it. But then redesign in a way that makes sense, not just by randomly slicing the plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don't understand why the Mayor can't find a way to make you guys at Murch whole and just build the school as originally planned. Does she want to lose Ward 3 again? Surely she's not going to run unopposed next time

Is it a Chris Christie Bridge situation - I.e., she's sticking it to the people who supported Catania"

There was a Cheh for Mayor sign in the front yard across the street 50 feet from where they are putting the new part of the building. I'd call that sticking it to your supporter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don't understand why the Mayor can't find a way to make you guys at Murch whole and just build the school as originally planned. Does she want to lose Ward 3 again? Surely she's not going to run unopposed next time

Is it a Chris Christie Bridge situation - I.e., she's sticking it to the people who supported Catania"

There was a Cheh for Mayor sign in the front yard across the street 50 feet from where they are putting the new part of the building. I'd call that sticking it to your supporter.

lol, that was supposed to say "Bowser for Mayor."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don't understand why the Mayor can't find a way to make you guys at Murch whole and just build the school as originally planned. Does she want to lose Ward 3 again? Surely she's not going to run unopposed next time

The City has a huge surplus in its reserves this year. The D.C. Council needs to step in with some oversight of Bowser's mistakes and clean up a few of the messes (like Murch) with some of that money.

You are right, the city has the money. But even if the Council stepped in, it would likely too late to fix a modernization that is scheduled to start in June. The Mayor needs to fix this now. If you agree I hope you will call the Mayor's office on Monday and let her know -- especially if you don't have kids at Murch. Calling takes the same amount of time as posting here and has a bigger effect.

The full story of what is happening at Murch is a serious failure of city government on so many levels. It should disturb people no matter where they live in the city.

Call the mayor, but tell her to fix the boundaries first. Then, go back to the drawing board and come up with a reasonable construction design.

+1

Also Murch needs to zero-out OOB enrollment at the school as those students move on to middle school or otherwise leave. It doesn't make sense to have any OOB slots when the school is so over-enrolled with kids who live in the IB area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don't understand why the Mayor can't find a way to make you guys at Murch whole and just build the school as originally planned. Does she want to lose Ward 3 again? Surely she's not going to run unopposed next time

The City has a huge surplus in its reserves this year. The D.C. Council needs to step in with some oversight of Bowser's mistakes and clean up a few of the messes (like Murch) with some of that money.

You are right, the city has the money. But even if the Council stepped in, it would likely too late to fix a modernization that is scheduled to start in June. The Mayor needs to fix this now. If you agree I hope you will call the Mayor's office on Monday and let her know -- especially if you don't have kids at Murch. Calling takes the same amount of time as posting here and has a bigger effect.

The full story of what is happening at Murch is a serious failure of city government on so many levels. It should disturb people no matter where they live in the city.

Call the mayor, but tell her to fix the boundaries first. Then, go back to the drawing board and come up with a reasonable construction design.

+1

Also Murch needs to zero-out OOB enrollment at the school as those students move on to middle school or otherwise leave. It doesn't make sense to have any OOB slots when the school is so over-enrolled with kids who live in the IB area.

It does not seem reasonable to put 700+ kids on the property. Murch parents should be happy with a smaller cafeteria and simultaneously lobby to change the boundaries quickly instead of in ten years. Not sure why Murch parents think a bigger cafeteria solves their problems in this situation. It only pushes the overcrowding problem back a year or two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just don't understand why the Mayor can't find a way to make you guys at Murch whole and just build the school as originally planned. Does she want to lose Ward 3 again? Surely she's not going to run unopposed next time

The City has a huge surplus in its reserves this year. The D.C. Council needs to step in with some oversight of Bowser's mistakes and clean up a few of the messes (like Murch) with some of that money.

There is a recently introduced petition encouraging DC to use some of that surplus to finish all school modernizations properly and sooner:

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/the-2022-campaign-for-school-modernization/signatures.html

This petition is *insane*. They want raid a quarter of DC's reserves to the tune of half a billion dollars to fully fund all school renovations. It is completely fiscally irresponsible. I would sign something that devoted more of the current year's surplus to renovations and other needs, but this ask is too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The boundaries won't fix anything: the schools around Murch are Janney, Layfayette, and Hearst
Janney is overcrowded. The northern part of Murch was already rerouted to Lafayette -- which would be overcrowded if more of Murch is rerouted there. The southern part of Murch was already rerouted to Hearst - except for houses literally a five minute walk from Murch. The problem at Murch is that the historic preservation people won't let us change the original building too much, and NPS won't allow building on the part of the land it owns -- necessitating having part of the project underground. That is the part that DC now doesn't want to pay for.

Maybe the answer is simply to enforce the existing boundaries strictly. IIRC, there are about 150 OOB students there. Seems a simple answer is to refuse any new OOB students until the school gets down to its capacity number. Not fair to remove the OOB students already in the school, so just let them work through via attrition, which should take 3 years. Problem mostly solved in three years. If school is still overcapacity after 3 years, then consider boundary changes.

That doesn't solve the current cost and design problems with renovation though. Seems like DCPS may need to delay renovation by 3-6 months to sort those out. Or maybe there are parts that can begin now. Frankly, I don't think Murch is entitled to all the money; if the budget needs to be cut, so be it. But then redesign in a way that makes sense, not just by randomly slicing the plan.

Within DCPS OOB families are a more important constituency than IB families. So it's doubtful that will happen.

[Anonymous]

Not 150 OOB - more like 60-70.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not 150 OOB - more like 60-70.

Even so, OOB slots are intended to utilize spare capacity in the schools. When a school is way overcrowded, there are not spare slots. As OOB students "graduate", no more should be taken, including siblings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The boundaries won't fix anything: the schools around Murch are Janney, Layfayette, and Hearst
Janney is overcrowded. The northern part of Murch was already rerouted to Lafayette -- which would be overcrowded if more of Murch is rerouted there. The southern part of Murch was already rerouted to Hearst - except for houses literally a five minute walk from Murch. The problem at Murch is that the historic preservation people won't let us change the original building too much, and NPS won't allow building on the part of the land it owns -- necessitating having part of the project underground. That is the part that DC now doesn't want to pay for.

Yes, can folks please stop harping the boundaries? The problem is that Ward 3 simply does not have enough elementary schools. There are no charters. There are lots of private schools but most IB folks can't afford those (yes, really), or simply believe in the social contract that calls for taxpayers to have decent neighborhood schools. If you're stuck on the specious issue of Murch boundaries, you simply don't understand the demographics and why that did not/would not have stemmed the swelling IB enrollments at Ward 3 schools.

Let's focus on the real issue here. DC sucks at planning. There is tremendous waste in the contracting process. While this most definitely needs to be fixed, the starting point should not be by building a mediocre, shoddy school simply to make a point that DC is somehow being fiscally responsible.

Social contract? You're batty. There is no shortage of families in DC who would consider Murch to be quite more than a decent school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The boundaries won't fix anything: the schools around Murch are Janney, Layfayette, and Hearst
Janney is overcrowded. The northern part of Murch was already rerouted to Lafayette -- which would be overcrowded if more of Murch is rerouted there. The southern part of Murch was already rerouted to Hearst - except for houses literally a five minute walk from Murch. The problem at Murch is that the historic preservation people won't let us change the original building too much, and NPS won't allow building on the part of the land it owns -- necessitating having part of the project underground. That is the part that DC now doesn't want to pay for.

Yes, can folks please stop harping the boundaries? The problem is that Ward 3 simply does not have enough elementary schools. There are no charters. There are lots of private schools but most IB folks can't afford those (yes, really), or simply believe in the social contract that calls for taxpayers to have decent neighborhood schools. If you're stuck on the specious issue of Murch boundaries, you simply don't understand the demographics and why that did not/would not have stemmed the swelling IB enrollments at Ward 3 schools.

Let's focus on the real issue here. DC sucks at planning. There is tremendous waste in the contracting process. While this most definitely needs to be fixed, the starting point should not be by building a mediocre, shoddy school simply to make a point that DC is somehow being fiscally responsible.

Social contract? You're batty. There is no shortage of families in DC who would consider Murch to be quite more than a decent school.

Missing the point again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not 150 OOB - more like 60-70.

According to this, it was about 100 in 2013-14. http://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Murch%20ES.pdf