LAMB closing its existing campuses and consolidating to one campus

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As has been clearly explained, there are many good reasons to not share this information yet. In fact, it would be stupid to do so for those exact reasons.

That people are in a huff over this shows that some of the poor communication is more a case of parent entitlement.

A years lead is insufficient time. People bought and sold houses based on the location of lamb. Any mention of school sponsored buses is treated like evidence of treason. It's exhausting what parents are demanded to do on a regular basis. BreakthRough Montessori let's parents drop off students at the curb instead of parking in a sketchy neighborhood and walking them inside. Yu Ying and Mundo verde sponsor buses (Mundo even subsidizes them!). Lamb expects parents to arrive at work late or preferably, not work at all. Now we can't be trusted to know (1) that we are moving and (2) that the move is permanent and far away from the current schools. Straight up RIDICULOUS.

Not a LAMB parent, but you just sound straight-up entitled. I don't know how you went about buying your house, but I didn't begin the process for buying mine by telling every potential seller "Hey! I'm desperate to buy! Big time! Please don't allow my publicized and obvious desperation to affect your asking price, okay?!"

From what can be gleaned of the publicly available information, the school has always wanted one singular campus. They may not get what they want, but that they're working towards it and have an eye to the future isn't hidden from view. Obviously their board is going to be privy to information that parents don't have. Hello?! If the board doesn't have the information then who is ultimately responsible for the school? The PTA?

You don't seem to understand how completely unrealistic you come across.

Telling the school community that LAMB is exploring options to move to a single, new (non-existing) campus in the near future (~1-3 years) would be a fair and honest approach, imo. You can do that without saying "we're leasing the Kingsbury property for a 10 year term starting in May 2018 at a price of such and such per year" or whatever.

The rest of your post is confusing bordering on incoherent. Is it common knowledge that LAMB is seeking a single campus such that any Seller would know that (and also know that the lease at SD is up in 2020)? Or is the Board effectively keeping that info such a secret that they gain some kind of bargaining strength? Those two positions are mutually exclusive. Also, you buying a house is a bad analogy. The market for the kind of properties LAMB would be looking at is very small, and all of the potential Sellers, Buyers and even specific properties are known to all parties. Finally, if its true that LAMB is at a point where multiple employees are leaking that this deal is probable to close in time that they would open the 2018 school year there, then it is already far along in discussions and the Seller already knows exactly what LAMBs desired timeline is.

"Obviously their board is going to be privy to information that parents don't have." Yes, obviously, since that is what this whole thread is about. I don't think anyone is suggesting that they circulate the minutes of their board meetings or anything. But there is some information about medium-term strategic planning goals that a responsible and empathetic board should share with the community. Whether this info fits that description is hard to say.

[Anonymous]

Not everything is available in internet time. So stupid to think so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here-- I heard this from two different people who work at the school, but I'd love if it weren't true. PP, have you heard differently?

Two different people who work at the school have said this? I am a LAMB parent and have only heard them say in the past that they would like to consolidate. They recently sent an email to parents detailing a plan for next school year that included plans for all three campuses (South Dakota, Missouri, Walter Reed). Seems odd there would be a simultaneous plan to consolidate after just sending out that email.....

I toured LAMB earlier this year and I understood that the mid-term plan was to consolidate LAMB at the Walter Reed Campus.

Yeah, a large part of the reason why this rumor would be so upsetting to so many people (if it is proven true) is that they've been suggesting what they told you to everyone left, right and center for a long time, up to and including as recently as a couple of weeks ago.

If they were working up a deal to open a brand new consolidated campus by 2018 the whole time they were pitching that line, it would not reflect well on an administration already suffering a reputation of poor communication bordering on dishonesty.

[Anonymous]

Those "ifs" are carrying a ton of weight.

[Anonymous]

Also, anyone who buys a house based on charter school location gets to be called a republican forever.

[Anonymous]

YY families didn't find out about the Taylor St. campus until the deal was done.

Rumors flew for years. Parents were angry and wanted more information than the school could give. Some families left. Ultimately, the facility acquisition happened. Most families stayed and many more new families applied.

(All of this was just a precursor to the DCI drama.)

Parents always want to know everything - that's natural. Charter schools in the acquisition stage need to hold back - that's sensible. These are competing desires - that's unavoidable.

My family was in a position to be flexible; hence my sanguine take. We had options and a few years to wait it out. If you're not able to be flexible, then maybe a situation that inherently demands flexibility isn't for you. Nobody but you knows that. Alas, your tight spot doesn't alter the larger picture. Getting irate over a strategic situation that's beyond the school's control is a waste of energy: the school can't do anything differently and now you're just angry.

If you need more certainty and security, then you can find that in the suburbs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, anyone who buys a house based on charter school location gets to be called a republican forever.

I'm an Independent. I know and respect many Republicans. The only people I know who consistently complain about charter schools (and/or their locations) are Democrats.

Your opinion merits mocking, not emulation.

[Anonymous]

There is not room at LAMBs WR space for all its students. So that is not happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As has been clearly explained, there are many good reasons to not share this information yet. In fact, it would be stupid to do so for those exact reasons.

That people are in a huff over this shows that some of the poor communication is more a case of parent entitlement.

A years lead is insufficient time. People bought and sold houses based on the location of lamb. Any mention of school sponsored buses is treated like evidence of treason. It's exhausting what parents are demanded to do on a regular basis. BreakthRough Montessori let's parents drop off students at the curb instead of parking in a sketchy neighborhood and walking them inside. Yu Ying and Mundo verde sponsor buses (Mundo even subsidizes them!). Lamb expects parents to arrive at work late or preferably, not work at all. Now we can't be trusted to know (1) that we are moving and (2) that the move is permanent and far away from the current schools. Straight up RIDICULOUS.

Sketchy?? Lol I had no problem parking blocks away from Bridges at that location. No more likely to have car broken into than Dupont etc. And MV does not have buses, it has a bus that is really, really expensive. I'm sure Lamb could do the same. MV does not subsidize, they charge more for huger income to pay Forbes lower income. If you pay for bus, before and aftercare, you can easily be close to $1k a month. It's absurd!! I think it's about the same to ride the MV bus as it is to Uber from Mt Pleasant to campus. It's laughable.

This is all untrue PP. feel free to call Mundo and ask. I did. They spent $35,000 subsidizing the buses and the cost is around $150 a month.

[Anonymous]

Actually $141 a month.

https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1vbaxSYDq4oDEHsu2XS3tUDDlN27cHXJEXmhH-KXYymw/pub

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:YY families didn't find out about the Taylor St. campus until the deal was done.

Rumors flew for years. Parents were angry and wanted more information than the school could give. Some families left. Ultimately, the facility acquisition happened. Most families stayed and many more new families applied.

(All of this was just a precursor to the DCI drama.)

Parents always want to know everything - that's natural. Charter schools in the acquisition stage need to hold back - that's sensible. These are competing desires - that's unavoidable.

My family was in a position to be flexible; hence my sanguine take. We had options and a few years to wait it out. If you're not able to be flexible, then maybe a situation that inherently demands flexibility isn't for you. Nobody but you knows that. Alas, your tight spot doesn't alter the larger picture. Getting irate over a strategic situation that's beyond the school's control is a waste of energy: the school can't do anything differently and now you're just angry.

If you need more certainty and security, then you can find that in the suburbs.

This is wise advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YY families didn't find out about the Taylor St. campus until the deal was done.

Rumors flew for years. Parents were angry and wanted more information than the school could give. Some families left. Ultimately, the facility acquisition happened. Most families stayed and many more new families applied.

(All of this was just a precursor to the DCI drama.)

Parents always want to know everything - that's natural. Charter schools in the acquisition stage need to hold back - that's sensible. These are competing desires - that's unavoidable.

My family was in a position to be flexible; hence my sanguine take. We had options and a few years to wait it out. If you're not able to be flexible, then maybe a situation that inherently demands flexibility isn't for you. Nobody but you knows that. Alas, your tight spot doesn't alter the larger picture. Getting irate over a strategic situation that's beyond the school's control is a waste of energy: the school can't do anything differently and now you're just angry.

If you need more certainty and security, then you can find that in the suburbs.

This is wise advice.

My kids' needs will always come before the needs of the school. That seems to be the suggestion here- yank your kids from the school or wake them up extra early and Ferry them across town. It's more important that the school have its needs met before those of my kids. That's not okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YY families didn't find out about the Taylor St. campus until the deal was done.

Rumors flew for years. Parents were angry and wanted more information than the school could give. Some families left. Ultimately, the facility acquisition happened. Most families stayed and many more new families applied.

(All of this was just a precursor to the DCI drama.)

Parents always want to know everything - that's natural. Charter schools in the acquisition stage need to hold back - that's sensible. These are competing desires - that's unavoidable.

My family was in a position to be flexible; hence my sanguine take. We had options and a few years to wait it out. If you're not able to be flexible, then maybe a situation that inherently demands flexibility isn't for you. Nobody but you knows that. Alas, your tight spot doesn't alter the larger picture. Getting irate over a strategic situation that's beyond the school's control is a waste of energy: the school can't do anything differently and now you're just angry.

If you need more certainty and security, then you can find that in the suburbs.

This is wise advice.

My kids' needs will always come before the needs of the school. That seems to be the suggestion here- yank your kids from the school or wake them up extra early and Ferry them across town. It's more important that the school have its needs met before those of my kids. That's not okay.

I don't get that. It's that there is going to be uncertainty for most charters -- and if you can't tolerate it, then you need to figure out something else. It's not a neighborhood school that will always be there. They are just different beasts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YY families didn't find out about the Taylor St. campus until the deal was done.

Rumors flew for years. Parents were angry and wanted more information than the school could give. Some families left. Ultimately, the facility acquisition happened. Most families stayed and many more new families applied.

(All of this was just a precursor to the DCI drama.)

Parents always want to know everything - that's natural. Charter schools in the acquisition stage need to hold back - that's sensible. These are competing desires - that's unavoidable.

My family was in a position to be flexible; hence my sanguine take. We had options and a few years to wait it out. If you're not able to be flexible, then maybe a situation that inherently demands flexibility isn't for you. Nobody but you knows that. Alas, your tight spot doesn't alter the larger picture. Getting irate over a strategic situation that's beyond the school's control is a waste of energy: the school can't do anything differently and now you're just angry.

If you need more certainty and security, then you can find that in the suburbs.

This is wise advice.

My kids' needs will always come before the needs of the school. That seems to be the suggestion here- yank your kids from the school or wake them up extra early and Ferry them across town. It's more important that the school have its needs met before those of my kids. That's not okay.

I don't get that. It's that there is going to be uncertainty for most charters -- and if you can't tolerate it, then you need to figure out something else. It's not a neighborhood school that will always be there. They are just different beasts.

+1.

Also, it's important to remember that while from your lens the needs of your own child always come first, from the school's lens, the long-term viability and health of the school are going to trump the needs of individual kids or even individual cohorts of kids. That's not to say families' needs don't matter--of course they do. But the school's view is necessarily long-range, and they have to look ahead to all of the classes that will follow. When you choose a school still in search of a long-term permanent location, you run the risk that the one they pick may not be as convenient for you as the current location, and at that point, you can decide whether to stay or go. Frankly, that's why we turned down a charter that we got into--we knew they were outgrowing their current location and were actively looking to move in a couple of years, and I didn't see many likely options in our immediate area, so chances were good that they would move farther away from us. We liked the school, but not enough to be in limbo for that time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:YY families didn't find out about the Taylor St. campus until the deal was done.

Rumors flew for years. Parents were angry and wanted more information than the school could give. Some families left. Ultimately, the facility acquisition happened. Most families stayed and many more new families applied.

(All of this was just a precursor to the DCI drama.)

Parents always want to know everything - that's natural. Charter schools in the acquisition stage need to hold back - that's sensible. These are competing desires - that's unavoidable.

My family was in a position to be flexible; hence my sanguine take. We had options and a few years to wait it out. If you're not able to be flexible, then maybe a situation that inherently demands flexibility isn't for you. Nobody but you knows that. Alas, your tight spot doesn't alter the larger picture. Getting irate over a strategic situation that's beyond the school's control is a waste of energy: the school can't do anything differently and now you're just angry.

If you need more certainty and security, then you can find that in the suburbs.

This is wise advice.

My kids' needs will always come before the needs of the school. That seems to be the suggestion here- yank your kids from the school or wake them up extra early and Ferry them across town. It's more important that the school have its needs met before those of my kids. That's not okay.

Fortunately, your kid is in Montessori, where they'll learn that they're not the center of the universe and need to be mature enough to accept other people's needs.