VoSD - Plan in the works for Cuts without Closing Sites

VoSD link to articles regarding reducing the costs at SDUSD without closing sites:

http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/public_safety/pavement/article_9b91661c-00e5-11e1-a1a7-001cc4c002e0.html


However, apparently recent actions have resulted in reducing SDUSD's bond rating.  This will make it more expensive for SDUSD to borrow money to make payroll.

http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/public_safety/pavement/article_3574c4e6-00e0-11e1-96f0-001cc4c002e0.html


Moody's SDUSD Credit Rating

Array of Recent VoSD Articles and BoE Video Link

Below are links to several Voice of San Diego articles regarding School Closure and a link to the video of the BoE meeting last Tuesday.

The U-T ran a front page article on the BoE meeting.  However, little new to this blog was presented other than comments from a consultant, Ron Bennett.  The comments from Mr. Bennett were not detailed enough to identify a potential path towards or away from insolvency or state receivership.

Video of BoE Meeting



http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/431/reports/2011/1025/video2.html
8:30 CPJMA performance
106:20 Ron Little on X Factor
116:05 Transportation 5-year Plan
178:10 School Realignment/Closure

VoSD Links


CPJMA performance photos
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/credentialed/article_d201eb68-fffa-11e0-b3d4-001cc4c002e0.html

How Schools were targeted for closure:
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/public_safety/pavement/article_0f71c7e0-003a-11e1-98d5-001cc4c03286.html

Declining enrollment:
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/clipboard/article_68ee3a56-0008-11e1-aeaf-001cc4c03286.html

Board of Ed meeting recap:
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/public_safety/pavement/article_c1ecc21c-ff9a-11e0-b5bd-001cc4c002e0.html

"Unfinished questions"
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/clipboard/article_7461e0a4-003f-11e1-a5b3-001cc4c002e0.html

MB Principal's Impact Report

The document below was delivered to the Realignment Committee as feedback.

From: Devicariis Susan [mailto:sdevicariis@sandi.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 10:47 AM
To: Barnett Scott; Hilgers Frederick; Merino Mitzi; Stover Philip; Tavasci
Magdalena; Castillo-Duvall Elizabeth; Turner Sherry; Martel Julie; Brian
Cantanzaro; Amy Monroe; jennifer tandy
Subject: Mission Bay Cluster Principal Feedback Report

Hello All,

The cluster principals met on October 25th to discuss the potential school
closure.  The principals wanted to make sure that central office folks
understood that there would be some impacts that would need to be addressed.
We all understand the need to right size the district and we will do
everything in our power to assure our families in the cluster are supported.
If you have any questions regarding our information, please let Julie Martel
know as she is our cluster leader.  Thank you for your consideration.



Susan DeVicariis
School Principal
Kate Sessions Elementary School
2150 Beryl Street
San Diego, CA 92109
858-273-3111

Mission Bay Cluster Principal Impact Report

Questions posed to SDUSD - RE: School Closure

SDUSD is seeking a specific recommendation from the MB Cluster.  However, consensus in the MB Cluster has been difficult to achieve.  In part, this is because there is not a common understanding of the situation.

The following questions were posed to Phil Stover and Scott Barnett:

Phil/Scott,

Thank you for the encouragement.  As you may have understood from my presentation to you last week and my discussions with each of you personally, there are a number of issues the impede the achieving consensus and provided a recommendation.  The biggest issue I have in driving consensus is that a sizable portion of the parents, teachers, and staff do not believe the financial situation is a dire as portrayed.  In addition, most do not believe SDUSD will actually close PBMS.  Regardless of the objective information I have provided or the testimonials from the two of you, they are still in disbelief. 

This being said here are the barriers I perceive to consensus or recommendation.  Almost all are a direct question from individuals attending our meetings or captured in discussion.  These do not represent my personal questions.

Transportation

• Reports from the LJ Cluster are that a survey has been conducted regarding whether or not families will attend campuses if they are not offered free or subsidized transportation.  The verbal account received by our cluster is that there are very few families that will transport their students to campuses without SDUSD provided transporation.  We want the results of this survey and any plans for a survey for our student population.  Ideally we want a survey conducted of our students population.
• We want the transportation demographics across SDUSD.  Although Roy MacPhail did not have them Thursday, it seems like simple mathematics.  I expect SDUSD knows how many students ride an SDUSD bus from where to where.  Provide this a table and I will do the rest.  I have the rest of the information in a database.
• There has been reference to "four" transportation plans.  We need to have the documents describing each of these plans and any results of preference or BoE discussion as well as the relative costs (esp. from unrestricted funds).
• There appears to be a plan to phase out SDUSD transportation over time.  The duration and specifics need to be provided.  This affects our timeline and details regarding a recommendation.

Policy/Preference Barriers to Changing the Recommendation (e.g. External Factors)

• Magnet status seems to be a strong factor to SDUSD with regards to school realignment.  In other words, it does not seem acceptable to discontinue the Magnet program at either MBHS or CP.  Without funding, the Magnet program status seems inconsequential and possibly biased against resident students.  Is this negotiable?  What are the terms of negotiation?
• The Federal grant for MBHS expiring in 2013 seems tied to Magnet status.  Please clarify if this plays a role in SDUSD's recommendation and explain the consequences of:  6 - 12 IB Academy as well as any other configuration at MB Cluster including merger with LJ Cluster.
• Services for Special Education are a considerable cause for concern, especially for BVT parents.  It appears that they are not a factor in decision making at SDUSD.  It appears that SDUSD will either provide new facilities at other sites or enable students with Special Education needs to attend BVT regardless of the Magnet program.  Please clarify who makes this decision and the factors involved.
• Clarify the admissions policy regarding Magnet programs as it pertains to residents of the MB Cluster attending a Magnet campus in the MB Cluster.  Describe or deliver the policy document that describes the procedure of selection.  Explain why the CP program was limited in enrollment below the Program Capacity of the site, who made this decision, and why.
• Will the MB Cluster be able to dictate policies at the new 6 - 12 IB Academy such as:  dress code, preparation requirements for attendance, enrollment in minimum number of IB classes, retention of IB trained teachers in exception of Post-and-Bid, reduction in support of remedial or non-IB preparatory coursework due to limited staff size/enrollment?
• What barriers exist at SDUSD to merging MB and LJ Clusters?
• Staff (certificated and classfied) at MB Cluster sites have a conflict of interest in any configuration change (jobs lost/reassigned).  Clusters were encouraged to include staff in voting and membership in committee.  This has recently been called into question by members of the cluster.  Are there any barriers to limiting voting of our recommendations to parents and community members without including staff?

Financial Tradeoffs

• The first feedback you received was that MB Cluster does not want its sites closed at all.  Teachers and parents are asking MB Cluster Officers if they can just say "no" to school closure.  They want SDUSD and the BoE to find other ways to close the financial gap.  Apparently, recent protests at Dana MS appear to have persuaded changes in the recommendation without any rationale.  Is all we have to do is wear red shirts for a day and we won't have to have our sites closed?  What are the repercussions of not closing sites?
• More specifically, Roy MacPhail indicated that SDUSD does not operate at full capacity under the State law and SDEA contract.  There is room to increase student:teacher ratio at the primary grades.  Please quantify the total savings required to operate SDUSD.  Then quantify the budget cuts contemplated to put school closure into context.  Next, quantify the savings if all classrooms were at the maximum student:teacher ratio and communicate the number of corresponding teacher layoffs.  Finally, quantify the savings if all X Factor funding were eliminated in AY 2012/13.
• If the target number of sites were closed, this was described as a $5M savings.  Quantify how SDUSD would be different than the above case given this appears to only increase the number of teachers by:  $5M/$90k = 55 teachers across the entire SDUSD.
• If we close more sites than is requested, indicate how we would benefit.
• Provide a complete list of recommendations for all clusters so MB Cluster can see that other clusters are participating the shared sacrifice.
• Provide a projection of where the students that currently attend MBHS and PBMS will attend public school when transportation is discontinued for our campus.
• Provide a projection of how SDUSD will provide education for the > 6000 students from Hoover, Lincoln, Morse, and San Diego.  Will Prop. S funds be used to provide additional facilities?  How will this impact Prop. S funds for the MB Cluster - either existing plans for Prop. S or funds to provide construction for 6 - 12 IB Academy.
• Provide financial plan for remodeling the Education Center at Normal Street and the source of funds.

Site Disposal

• As indicated, only one person in the entire dozens of hours of debate and discussion has raised interest in selling sites that are closed.  Please document discussions regarding site sale or direct us towards minutes (BoE) or in committee regarding site sale.
• Estimate the real estate value of sites already sold and their location.
• Provide direction towards lease value of sites leased and lease potential for MB Cluster sites as well as the remaining SDUSD sites considered for closure.
• Direct us towards the policy or law that will be followed for decisions, options, review, and bidding process fro site disposal.

That is the short list.  Let me know if you need any clarification to any questions.

Brian

---

From: Barnett Scott <sbarnett@sandi.net>
To: Amy Monroe <amydmonroe@hotmail.com>
Cc: Stover Philip <pstover@sandi.net>; Merino Mitzi <mmerino@sandi.net>; Family Catanzaro <pbcatanzaro@pacbell.net>
Sent: Tue, October 25, 2011 11:49:17 AM
Subject: Re: Board of Education Meeting TONIGHT 5pm
Will be discussing busing tonight and it will likely impact closing.
Do you know what questions have been asked that have not been answered that are relevant to the specific closure issues in MB cluster?
I think it may make sense to have Phil's team meet with the MB closure sub committee and ensure the relevant unanswered questions are addressed so then the entire cluster board will be able to make a recommendation prior to November 29th
Thanks
Scott Barnett
Sent from my iPad

Documents on School Realignment (Closure) to be Presented Tonight at BoE

Below is the presentation intended to be delivered tonight. Follow this link for a comparison with the presentation delivered to the MB Cluster on 09-19-11: http://mbcluster2010.blogspot.com/2011/09/mtg-sep-19-2011-elections-school.html

REVISED 10-24-11 School Realignment Update Presentation, 10-25-11

Questions Answered by SDUSD about School Closure

A number of e-mail messages and phone conversations have resulted in some clarity regarding aspects of school closure.  These are captured below as paraphrased conversations or as email question/answer.

Short Questions and Answers (General):
Answer from Deputy Superintendent of Business Phil Stover

• "[Does] PBMS need to close to meet SDUSD goals? " Our task has been to make recommendations regarding the closing of ten schools.  PBMS campus is one of them.  Others are now suggesting that we consider closing 20-30 schools.
• Strategy to move CP and impact on staff moving to BVT I have found out that indeed, if we move the Crown Point program and keep its CDC code, the program together with its existing teachers will move in toto.  Teachers will not be placed in excess or have to participate in a post and bid situation.
• What is the plan for busing at SDUSD?  As an aside, I just reviewed the transportation recommendations for Tuesday night.  None of the four include maintaining transportation for MBHS beyond a few years.  Certainly a number of students will find their own way to school, but a significant number will leave.  The board could direct that MBHS transportation be maintained, but I have not heard that discussed by them.
• [Brian] Many of your questions are indeed in the purview of our Board.  I do believe that transportation will be further restricted.  We will know more on Oct 25.  This will indeed have a dramatic impact on MBHS and its continued viability.  The age and condition of PBMS was a driver, in addition to a desire to provide a long term viability for MBHS.  Crown Point wants to grow.  So BVT campus provides that opportunity.  Other schools have capacity to house the BVT students.  The special ed program there can stay.  That is about it.  Nothing nefarious.  No one did any analysis of the relative value of any sites, using that data for decision making.
• my thoughts about our upcoming meetings….it seems more and more, as the district financial situation worsens that schools will be closed.  Therefore I think the most helpful information for the committee will be alternatives to existing recommendations.  Pushback in and of itself is everyone’s right, but in the absence of alternative suggestions that save the district money, my sense is that the recommendations will need to go forward.  It appears more likely that transportation will be severely reduced which, in the absence of change will devastate schools such as MBHS.  Please encourage your folks to come prepared to offer alternatives or options in addition to pushback. 

 

Short Questions and Answers (Special Education):
Answer from Executive Director Susan Martinez

•  "...I would appreciate it if you could give me a specific plan as to how you plan to relocate the Special Needs kids from BVT to the other elementary schools?  For example, how many to each school?  What support will be necessary for each school to accomadate the new students..."  At the present time there are no plans to move the special education classes from BVT.  Mr. Stover’s question to me was regarding the kinds of supports and services provided students with IEPs at BVT.  My response was, generally speaking, that any of the services could be provided at another site if necessary.

Magnet:  Why is it so important to SDUSD?  How does this impact MB Cluster and Site Closure?
Conversation with Magnet Director Carolyn Goohs

• Magnet programs are hoped to raise academic achievement and close traditional achievement gaps by attracting students that have a common interest (e.g. music, IB) from all over the district to a single site.  This commonality is expected to increase student interest and parent participation.  Data to support this hypothesis should be available, but has yet to be analyzed for MB Cluster sites.
• Magnet campus provide preferential enrollment to create a campus that reflect the economic and ethnic diversity of SDUSD.  MB Cluster in uniquely positioned to participate.  Due to its ethnic diversity, economic diversity, and moderate academic test scores, students of the MB Cluster tend to be favored in the enrollment process at local Magnet schools even though those schools are not expected to be preferential to residents.
• Magnet is a nationally recognized term that enables SDUSD to apply for grants.  This has directly impacted MBHS in two consecutive grants.  The second grant a three year, ongoing grant and expires in 2013.  It is very unlikely that MBHS will receive another grant due to this recent success.
• The plan proposed by SDUSD is to move the CP program to BVT specifically to move and maintain the Magnet program.  The SDUSD goal is that, even without specific financial support, the music program will be implemented at the former BVT site and that this will help close the achievement gap among students with traditionally low academic performance.  It is perceived that eliminating the Magnet component of CP (either at CP or BVT) will negatively impact academic performance as well as the image of SDUSD.
• MBHS is a Magnet campus with an IB program emphasis.  Current enrollment indicates that the percentage of students of hispanic ethnicity is significantly higher than the SDUSD average.  As a consequence, the Magnet department has an interest in increasing the percentage of students of asian ethnicity at this campus.  However, it is unlikely that this could be achieved by using SDUSD provided transportation.
• Transfer of the IB program to Muirlands and/or LJHS is administratively possible.  However, the impact on the grant funding is uncertain.

MB Cluster Meeting - School Closure

Last night the MB Cluster Committee met for three hours to discuss school closure.  The purpose of the meeting was:

• Review the Proposal from SDUSD to close certain sites,
• Review the findings of the MB Cluster Task Force the volunteered to investigate the issues,
• Review options for school closure considered by the MB Cluster Committee Task Force,
• Poll the MB Cluster Committee Members regarding their opinion on various options.

Polling


Polls regarding opinions (In Favor / Opposed) to various options were conducted.  The polls were taken from the Cluster Committee Members.  Committee Membership was apportioned according to the number of pupils at each site.  Eligibility includes:  parents of students, staff at sites, and community members residing in the attendance zone.  Ultimately, the principal of each site dictated how Committee Members were selected, be it by appointment or vote.

The concept of the Committee Member was to provide representation of the interests of the community, students and staff of the site.  In some cases Committee Members were established weeks prior.  In other cases they were assigned last night.

A straw poll was taken at the start of the meeting for various options.   The poll was designed to provoke consideration of the options as we reviewed the issues.  A final poll was taken at the conclusion of the meeting.  The final poll was not significantly different than the straw poll.

Recommendation

The MB Cluster Committee did not provide a recommendation to SDUSD.  Given the short amount of time, complexity of the issues, and challenge in achieving consensus a single recommendation was not produced.  Instead, the opinion regarding each of several options was considered individually as "In Favor" or "Opposed".

The opinion regarding each option may change dramatically under a number of conditions:

• Further consideration of the details of each option,
• Change in financial condition of the SDUSD,
• Impact of reduced busing on student enrollment,
• Further discussion within each site's community

Material Reviewed


Below is the material reviewed by the MB Cluster Committee.  The results of the polling are inside the document.


111019 Cluster Meeting (w Poll)