Dock Street, IS 611, MS 313, and the #D13 Rezoning

The following post is co-authored by fellow cec13brooklyn council member Maggie Spillane and myself. (Please note these statements solely reflect those of Maggie and me and do not reflect the thoughts of the entire CEC.)

The CEC13 Brooklyn​ calendar meeting is this Wednesday, September 30th – 6:30pm (we suggest you arrive by 6pm to get a seat) at PS 307.

At this meeting we expect the CEC will get a formal proposal from the NYC Department of Education​ regarding the #D13rezoning of PS 307 and PS 8.

Assuming the proposal is the same as the draft proposed scenario shared on September 1, and while we will continue to solicit and consider any additional information and viewpoints, we believe the current proposal merits our support with respect to the two elementary schools involved.  

HOWEVER, we are very concerned by the continuing uncertainly surrounding the new middle school, IS 611, previously committed to the CEC and scheduled to open at Dock St. next year (September 2016).

The long-term viability of the rezoning is premised in part on re-siting M.S. 313, which is presently co-located with P.S. 307, in an allocated footprint of hundreds of seats. Conversations with the DOE over the summer indicated they planned to propose re-siting MS 313 to Dock St.  We raised concerns about both the vagueness and the timing of this concept and asked that any rezoning proposal contain specifics about the re-siting.  

Further discussions with the District Superintendent clarified that the plan would be to open IS 611 as a new middle school into which MS 313 would subsequently merge. The Superintendent stated that the DOE would conduct meetings with the MS 313 community to ensure a merger plan that was welcoming and viable to the ongoing families at that school. Additional meetings would be held across the district to solicit input about what current elementary school families wanted in their new middle school at Dock Street.

Last week, DOE officials represented, in verbal responses to the public, that M.S. 313 would be re-sited into the Dock Street building, be re-named, and possibly receive new programming and a new admissions policy.  Neither the CEC nor the public has been provided with any information about these contemplated changes and we are not aware of any efforts the DOE has made to involve families in these decisions.  

There is no information in the Middle School Directory that would indicate these type of changes to prospective families.

In informal further discussion with the DOE, we received no additional detail about these changes, but the DOE indicated that, in contrast with prior representations, it no longer expects Dock Street to house a new middle school but simply to house only MS 313 (along with the 100-seat pre-k space also to be sited in the Dock St building).

While we understand re-siting is important to the rezoning proposal, we also believe that the middle school quality crisis is the the biggest problem in District 13 right now, more important and more urgent than even the PS 8 waitlist. Accordingly we cannot support a rezoning plan that does not come along with specific commitments with respect to IS 611 and MS 313 that are more in-line with prior representations about the Dock Street middle school. We request:

  • A commitment that IS 611 will be a choice middle school open to all of District 13;
  • An explicit admissions plan for IS 611 that will promote diversity;
  • An academic plan that will serve the academic needs of a diverse student body, including and especially students who are lagging in their academic performance AND students who are accelerated and need advanced academics;
  • A concrete, specific plan for how MS 313 students, staff, administration, and families will be transitioned into IS 611;
  • A communications and change management strategy to make prospective D13 middle school parents (i.e., 5th grade parents) aware of the changes coming to MS 313 and of the IS 611 option and how to apply, including by making IS 611 an option on the New Schools Application expected in March 2016 for September 2016 enrollment;
  • 100% Fair Student Funding, as is uniformly provided to new schools;
  • Clarity that neither MS 8 nor Arts & Letters are being moved to Dock St.

Additionally, we know that with additional pressure for middle school capacity, IS 611 alone will not fully remedy the middle school crisis in District 13.  We also call on the NYC DOE to clearly and publicly endorse the M.S. OneBrooklyn​ vision for a dedicated middle school at the new school facility recently approved by the City Council at Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park in Prospect Heights.

We believe the lack of clarity around the use of Dock Street has fueled much speculation and political maneuvering that is needlessly and destructively adding to the tensions concerning rezoning PS 8 and PS 307. This must end.  

Simultaneously, the DOE’s delay in engaging the community and creating and announcing a viable plan for IS 611, and the merging of MS 313 into 611, is inexcusably contributing to the challenges of our D13 middle schools.  It is adding to the already considerable uncertainty for families across the entire district who are in the middle school choice process.  In so doing, it is creating barriers to diverse recruitment into the new school that it may struggle to overcome.

It is not acceptable that the very important opportunity of Dock St, and especially IS 611, be treated as an afterthought to any PS 8 and PS 307 rezoning. District 13 was committed a new middle school at Dock Street open to all D13 students and that’s exactly what we expect delivered for next year.

Signed,
CEC13 Elected Members Maggie Spillane (PS 9 parent) & Rob Underwood (PS/MS 282 parent)

Thoughts on the PS 8 and PS 307 #D13Rezoning

The proposed #D13Rezoning of PS 8 and PS 307 is now garnering national attention. Both the NY Times and Wall Street Journal have done stories about the rezoning topic in the last day.

Given the attention being paid to this potential rezoning, I wanted to post some of my comments I’ve made about the many issues each of us as cec13brooklyn members, including myself, need to weigh once we have a formal proposal presented (expected September 30th) and we prepare to vote.

As I’ve written about before, I’m dismayed by Brooklyn’s educational parallel universes (i.e., the Mayor’s “two cities”) so evident in this discussion, as well as the contradictions and conundrum inherent in advocating for the opt-out movement and yet citing test scores as a reason to not send your child to a particular school. Some of the most difficult issues core to this discussion – segregation and racism – were the initial impetus for my interest in district planning and the CEC (especially in 2009 as the new 133 plan was being developed) and have been a critical factor at my children’s school, psms282 (itself the subject of several NY Daily News opinion pieces on the topic of NYC school segregation here and here.)

Here first is a comment I posted originally to Facebook last week.

I applaud Mayor Bill de Blasio for speaking up on the Brian Lehrer Show about the need to demand developers build schools in and around new residential construction. (Also – Both CEC13 Brooklyn and myself are big fans of the ‪#‎CS4All‬ initiative and applaud that announcement).

This in mind, and as we discuss collectively and respectfully the PS 307 / PS 8 rezoning with each other, we should keep in mind my great friend and fellow CEC member Ed Brown’s point towards the end of the PS 307 town hall about the under utilized schools in and around Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO, Fort Greene, and Downtown Brooklyn. We all see the high rises going up, and the potential is clearly there for a need for more middle and elementary seats. But while downtown schools like PS 46, PS 67, and PS 287 – even D13 schools further afield such as Park Slope School PS/MS 282 (my kids’ school) – go under-used by the community and their surrounding neighborhoods, the SCA is unlikely to make new elementary school buildings in D13 a priority, as planning happens at a district, not zone, level. When demanding new elementary schools be built, and thinking from a district planning perspective, we need to be mindful of the schools nearby that have unused seats. And as Ed challenged us, we should ask why are these schools struggling to fill their roster.

We also need to keep in mind that all elementary school students become middle schools students. When we’re asking about more elementary capacity, we must think ahead to middle school capacity. This is why initiatives such as M.S. OneBrooklyn are so important. All our kids in D13 deserve to have great middle school choices after they complete their elementary school education.

Today I reiterated some points above, expanded upon others, and made some points anew, in a Facebook comment:

(A)s CEC member who will be voting on this, I hope we use this as an opportunity to call attention to a few other issues, especially school funding, the billions owed by the state to the city in school funding (the state owes PS 307 $880K, PS 8 $2.1M), and the implicit expectation that PTAs must pick up much of, among other things, the cost of core enrichments important to attracting new parents and growing young lives. Many D13 schools are in a “doughnut hole” where they no longer have Title I status but still can’t produce the hundreds of thousands of dollars in PTA funds that some celebrated Brooklyn district public elementary schools can and do.

I hope too we look at testing and how test scores are used to evaluate schools. I struggle to get my head around white parents who are active in the opt-out movement and then use test scores as their rationale to avoid a school that is majority students of color. I also urge us to stop using phrases like “good school” and “bad school”.

I hope we also keep mindful of district wide needs and planning including that (and why) we have under-utilized elementary schools nearby. I also hope we can stay mindful of middle schools and the need to plan for strong middle school communities throughout the district. It’s great to advocate for more and stronger elementary schools – we also need strong middles for all those kids too.

I challenge all of of us – not just Black and White but our Asian and Hispanic sisters and brothers too – to think hard about diversity and segregation and what it means to live our values in our own lives and with our own children.

Finally I hope we can look more at how developers have come into communities like downtown and Prospect Heights getting huge tax breaks, public funding, and the power of eminent domain to tear down existing housing and offices to be replaced with gleaming towers. The developers much be held to account to the existing community, not just the one to which they market and is yet to come to Brooklyn.

Two closing points:

  • While I write this primarily in my CEC 13 capacity, I’m also a board member of Community Board 6, which mostly overlaps with District 15. As we think about middle and elementary school planning for Downtown Brooklyn, I urge everyone – including and especially the Downtown Brooklyn Schools Planning Working Group (DBSPWG) – to consider the District 15 portion of Downtown Brooklyn (primarily the PS 261 and PS 38 zones) as well as more broadly the impacts of new residential growth in developments such as Fortis/LICH. A coordinated, rationalized plan considering both District 13 and District 15 is crucial.
  • I really hope folks use this rezoning to reflect on educational equity. ALL kids deserve a great education at a safe school. I generally disagree with the negative characterizations of PS 307 – this is a school I know pretty well and there are amazing things happening there. But I find it troubling that only now that DUMBO children might be zoned for 307 that some DUMBO parents are taking an interest in a school in their own neighborhood, just blocks from their home. Did not the educational prospects of those children matter before the rezoning? If a school is not good enough for your child, is it good enough for any child? Again, I think PS 307 is a strong school community so I’m not asking these questions to imply I agree with the negative characterizations. I just am bothered that apparently few to any of these concerns with the school (307) were brought up by the DUMBO community when it was “other people’s children” going there. Do the educational opportunities we create for brown and black children from NYCHA houses – our neighbors – matter less? Do young #BlackLivesMatter?