Gray Proposes Reallocation of $100MM of DCPS Capital Modernization Funds

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably because publci schools cannot go to the Waltons and Gates for private funding.

You mean like the $25 million DCPS got from the Walton Foundation, part of $65 million for teacher raises?

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2010/04/06/dcps-teacher-contract-to-be-unveiled-big-raises-funded-by-65m-in-private-money/

Wow, you are opening -- perhaps unintentionally -- a huge bag of worms with that response. Do you have any idea about the back story to that funding?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably because publci schools cannot go to the Waltons and Gates for private funding.

You mean like the $25 million DCPS got from the Walton Foundation, part of $65 million for teacher raises?

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2010/04/06/dcps-teacher-contract-to-be-unveiled-big-raises-funded-by-65m-in-private-money/

Wow, you are opening -- perhaps unintentionally -- a huge bag of worms with that response. Do you have any idea about the back story to that funding?

I am the person who posted that link. Don't really know the back story, just remembered that the big raises under Rhee had been funded in part by very significant private donations. I googled "DCPS foundation teacher raises" and that was the first link that came up. Didn't mean to start anything, just to rebut the assertion that only charters have access to private funding.

I don't want to turn this into a charter vs. DCPS battle, because that is stupid and zero sum. But you can't deny that there are massive funding disparities between the two sectors, especially when it comes to facilities funding- even the Adequacy Study commissioned by DME was clear about it. The real solution is a top to bottom assessment and plan for how to deal with public school buildings, both in terms of their structures and their funding, in a way that best serves the needs of students in both sectors. In some kind of coherent, rational way that isn't nearly as susceptible to political trading as what currently happens. But that is about as likely as pigs flying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this is political pandering from Gray. I couldn't puzzle it out but the idea of kowtowing to Bowser's potential supporters and screwing Evans and Wells sounds like a possibility. We are six weeks out from the primary. I am sure he's trying to send a message to someone.

There are quite a lot of Ward 4 residents who will never be supporters of Bowser's mayoral run (myself included) because we haven't seen anything of true merit from her so putting money into Ward 4 schools doesn't pull my vote away from her whatsoever. She never had it in the first place.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Does anyone besides me look at this list and think that they are going to just close Payne and Garrison as part of the redrawing of boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably because publci schools cannot go to the Waltons and Gates for private funding.

You mean like the $25 million DCPS got from the Walton Foundation, part of $65 million for teacher raises?

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2010/04/06/dcps-teacher-contract-to-be-unveiled-big-raises-funded-by-65m-in-private-money/

Wow, you are opening -- perhaps unintentionally -- a huge bag of worms with that response. Do you have any idea about the back story to that funding?

I am the person who posted that link. Don't really know the back story, just remembered that the big raises under Rhee had been funded in part by very significant private donations. I googled "DCPS foundation teacher raises" and that was the first link that came up. Didn't mean to start anything, just to rebut the assertion that only charters have access to private funding.

I don't want to turn this into a charter vs. DCPS battle, because that is stupid and zero sum. But you can't deny that there are massive funding disparities between the two sectors, especially when it comes to facilities funding- even the Adequacy Study commissioned by DME was clear about it. The real solution is a top to bottom assessment and plan for how to deal with public school buildings, both in terms of their structures and their funding, in a way that best serves the needs of students in both sectors. In some kind of coherent, rational way that isn't nearly as susceptible to political trading as what currently happens. But that is about as likely as pigs flying.

This is where a large portion of private funds go to public teachers, funneled through a separate non-profit. It's not a secret.

http://dceducationfund.org/aboutus/supporters.html

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably because publci schools cannot go to the Waltons and Gates for private funding.

You mean like the $25 million DCPS got from the Walton Foundation, part of $65 million for teacher raises?

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2010/04/06/dcps-teacher-contract-to-be-unveiled-big-raises-funded-by-65m-in-private-money/

Wow, you are opening -- perhaps unintentionally -- a huge bag of worms with that response. Do you have any idea about the back story to that funding?

I don't know the back story, but I would like to

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone besides me look at this list and think that they are going to just close Payne and Garrison as part of the redrawing of boundaries.

The more I look at the Washington Post's list of "Winners and Losers," the more I think this reallocation could be related to the boundary overhaul. Several of the biggest winners are adjacent to the biggest losers.

Loser ($) / Winner ($)
Orr ES (-$14.8 M) / Stanton ES ($11.2 M)
Garfield ES (-$7.8 M) / Stanton ES - again. ($11.2 M)
West ES (-$6.8 M) / Powell ($19.5 M)
Payne ES (-$6.0 M) / Watkins ($0.5 M)

I can't speak for Garrison, but I heard from a Payne PTA member that they recently found asbestos as part of their prep work, which would definitely impact the cost of the renovation. Given that DCPS has a huge, under-enrolled school a block and a half away (Watkins), they certainly have to have at least thought about the idea of consolidating the two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone besides me look at this list and think that they are going to just close Payne and Garrison as part of the redrawing of boundaries.

The more I look at the Washington Post's list of "Winners and Losers," the more I think this reallocation could be related to the boundary overhaul. Several of the biggest winners are adjacent to the biggest losers.

Loser ($) / Winner ($)
Orr ES (-$14.8 M) / Stanton ES ($11.2 M)
Garfield ES (-$7.8 M) / Stanton ES - again. ($11.2 M)
West ES (-$6.8 M) / Powell ($19.5 M)
Payne ES (-$6.0 M) / Watkins ($0.5 M)

I can't speak for Garrison, but I heard from a Payne PTA member that they recently found asbestos as part of their prep work, which would definitely impact the cost of the renovation. Given that DCPS has a huge, under-enrolled school a block and a half away (Watkins), they certainly have to have at least thought about the idea of consolidating the two.

Watkins is under-enrolled? They are listed at 527 kids by DCPS. Seems like pretty solid enrollment. Did you mean Payne (245 kids) was under-enrolled?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone besides me look at this list and think that they are going to just close Payne and Garrison as part of the redrawing of boundaries.

The more I look at the Washington Post's list of "Winners and Losers," the more I think this reallocation could be related to the boundary overhaul. Several of the biggest winners are adjacent to the biggest losers.

Loser ($) / Winner ($)
Orr ES (-$14.8 M) / Stanton ES ($11.2 M)
Garfield ES (-$7.8 M) / Stanton ES - again. ($11.2 M)
West ES (-$6.8 M) / Powell ($19.5 M)
Payne ES (-$6.0 M) / Watkins ($0.5 M)

I can't speak for Garrison, but I heard from a Payne PTA member that they recently found asbestos as part of their prep work, which would definitely impact the cost of the renovation. Given that DCPS has a huge, under-enrolled school a block and a half away (Watkins), they certainly have to have at least thought about the idea of consolidating the two.

Watkins is under-enrolled? They are listed at 527 kids by DCPS. Seems like pretty solid enrollment. Did you mean Payne (245 kids) was under-enrolled?

I was thinking of in-bounds enrollment (22%?) at Watkins; 30-something% at Payne. You could take the 85 inbounds kids at Payne and integrate them into Watkins pretty easily.

I also missed

Garrison (-$6.1 M) / Marie Reed ($3.0 M)

[Anonymous]

I think this could also be chocked up to political motivations. If you cut one school and help another school close-by you dilute the opposition - from both the constituents and the Councilmembers.

[jsteele]

Jack Evans just said at the WAMU debate that he and Gray worked together to get funding for Garrison. If I heard correctly, that means the cut being discussed here are null and void.

Also, Bowser again refused commit regarding Henderson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably because publci schools cannot go to the Waltons and Gates for private funding.

You mean like the $25 million DCPS got from the Walton Foundation, part of $65 million for teacher raises?

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2010/04/06/dcps-teacher-contract-to-be-unveiled-big-raises-funded-by-65m-in-private-money/

Wow, you are opening -- perhaps unintentionally -- a huge bag of worms with that response. Do you have any idea about the back story to that funding?

I am the person who posted that link. Don't really know the back story, just remembered that the big raises under Rhee had been funded in part by very significant private donations. I googled "DCPS foundation teacher raises" and that was the first link that came up. Didn't mean to start anything, just to rebut the assertion that only charters have access to private funding.

I don't want to turn this into a charter vs. DCPS battle, because that is stupid and zero sum. But you can't deny that there are massive funding disparities between the two sectors, especially when it comes to facilities funding- even the Adequacy Study commissioned by DME was clear about it. The real solution is a top to bottom assessment and plan for how to deal with public school buildings, both in terms of their structures and their funding, in a way that best serves the needs of students in both sectors. In some kind of coherent, rational way that isn't nearly as susceptible to political trading as what currently happens. But that is about as likely as pigs flying.

This is where a large portion of private funds go to public teachers, funneled through a separate non-profit. It's not a secret.

http://dceducationfund.org/aboutus/supporters.html

DCI had specific feeders - as I recall, some of them were PUBLIC not charter schools, like Oyster.

[Anonymous]

No, oyster not a feeder. Only charters.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:Jack Evans just said at the WAMU debate that he and Gray worked together to get funding for Garrison. If I heard correctly, that means the cut being discussed here are null and void.

Also, Bowser again refused commit regarding Henderson.

Case study for the politicization of education in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Jack Evans just said at the WAMU debate that he and Gray worked together to get funding for Garrison. If I heard correctly, that means the cut being discussed here are null and void.

Also, Bowser again refused commit regarding Henderson.

Case study for the politicization of education in DC.

The politics have become disgusting and while people debate over which Wards "won" and which "lost", kids are losing. It is a shame that no one is trying to actually compare the physical needs of these buildings and prioritizing them appropriately.