I plan on attending the RCCD school board meeting tomorrow night (7pm at Brandywine Springs Elementary School). This is going to be interesting, mainly because the Concerned Neighbors of Cooke Elementary School’s stated concerns regarding the addition of Lancaster Court Apartments to Cooke’s feeder don’t hold water – they also keep changing. If you haven’t read my previous post on this issue and the comments, you should do so. Cooke commenters didn’t hold back on this thread. It’s quite enlightening and very sad.
Let’s go back and look at the original position that was edited to remove the line I’ve bold-ed:
Protest of Red Clay School Board’s Attendance Zone Decision for Cooke Elementary School
We demand that the Red Clay Consolidated School District School Board reverse their October 15 decision to deviate from the Attendance Zone feeder pattern that had been presented by the Attendance Zone Committee and accepted by the community. This last-minute decision undermined six months of work by the Attendance Zone Committee and did not give the community an opportunity to voice concerns. The students of Lancaster Court Apartments will not benefit from this decision, and the decision contradicts the Neighborhood Schools Act. The Board’s action was not ethical and the decision is not acceptable.
To understand where they are coming with the bold sentence we need to look no further than the comment left on the i-petition by the Concerned Neighbors of Cooke Elementary School:
“Absolutely agreed, Xudong! Board member Cathy Thompson (the only Board Member to vote AGAINST this motion) said that if we have an awesome turnout at the meeting, then there is a chance for the decision to be reversed!!! Show up no later than 6:30 at Brandywine Springs School prepared to share your points in 3 minutes or less. Main points can include:
1) The Board’s decision was not the right thing to do;
2) The community was given no voice as a result of their last-minute action;
3) This decision is NOT in the best interest of Lancaster Court Apartment students as they will not be eligible for Title 1 (special school funding and other benefits) that they would receive at another school. How is this helping students??
4) This decision violates the Neighborhood Schools Act;
5) Passing of the upcoming referendum is at risk if this decision is not reversed
The more presence we have at the meeting, the more of an impact we will make!!!”
This, of course, is not true. But after I posted on this last week the line about Lancaster Court Apt. children vanished. Guess someone finally read up on Title 1 and realized this argument had to go.
But this isn’t the only point this group is wrong about. Let’s go through them, shall we?
1. The School Board’s Vote:
Here is what they claim: “We demand that the Red Clay Consolidated School District School Board reverse their October 15 decision to deviate from the Attendance Zone feeder pattern that had been presented by the Attendance Zone Committee and accepted by the community. This last-minute decision undermined six months of work by the Attendance Zone Committee and did not give the community an opportunity to voice concerns.”
This point has been expanded on in comments here at DL and in the comments on the petition, but is it true? Did the board do something unethical? Illegal? Shady? Something they’ve never done before?
No. The Red Clay School Board has the authority to amend committee recommendations. It’s why they’re called recommendations. In fact, had any of these concerned neighbors attended the September board meeting they would have seen the board vote to amend the Social Media policy presented by that committee. Haven’t seen a petition on this amended vote, which should exist since this group is claiming their concerns are procedural.
Leave it to Steve Newton to ask the question: “let’s assume the board had followed whatever you think is proper procedure and still voted the same–can we then assume you would have refused to sign the petition? A simple yes or no to that one would suffice.” He never received an answer to that question. A part of me wishes the board would go through these brand new, never before used standards and still vote to include Lancaster Court Apartments. I’m sure everyone would be happy… right? This is about procedure… right?
Closing down this first point about the board’s vote… the petitioners are wrong. RCCD school board has the authority to amend committee recommendations and has done so in the past. People claiming otherwise are wrong.
2. The Neighborhood Schools Act (NSA):
Again, there’s a part of me that wants this Cooke group to push this point. It’s past time to blow this up. So… Please proceed, Concerned Neighbors of Cooke Elementary School. I am so fine with this.
But enough about my dreams, let’s discuss how they don’t understand the NSA. If the NSA required the building of new schools so each neighborhood could have an attendance zone circle (or square) drawn around it then they would have a point. But the NSA does not require the building of schools therefore neatly constructed attendance zones cannot exist. There are people in the Brandywine Springs, Linden Hill, North Star, Highlands, Warner, etc. feeder that live closer to other elementary schools. This is due to where the schools are physically located and capacity (the number of students the school can hold). So this idea that the NSA must be applied to the letter of the law is nonsense. It simply can’t be done, unless we can physically pick up and move existing schools to new locations.
Citing the NSA as part of their argument against including Lancaster Court Apartments doesn’t hold water and if this AZ is changed because of the NSA school boards better buckle up. They’ll be flooded with i-petitions and maps!
3. Non-Contiguous Attendance Zones:
This point ties into the NSA. The Concerned Neighbors of Cooke also sent out a flyer in which they claim in bold type:
“All Red Clay Elementary School feeders have contiguous boundaries (sharing a common border) in accordance to the Neighborhood Schools Act, why is this not the case for Cooke?”
Had they taken two seconds to look at the attendance zone map (they actually printed on their flyer) they would have seen that Warner has had a non-contiguous attendance zone for years. So if their point is that Cooke should not have a non-contiguous attendance zone due to the Neighborhood Schools Act then I guess we’ll have to redraw Warner’s attendance zone. Right?
4. Capacity
They’ve now added that new schools should have lower capacity due to potential growth. Fine. That’s a nice idea for all schools. Too bad they don’t have a legal leg to stand on. So, dare I say it? They are wrong again.
Yep, tomorrow’s RCCD board meeting will be interesting. Many people outside the Cooke community are watching.
I’ll say it again… Please proceed, Concerned Neighbors of Cooke Elementary School.