(SPS video of Saturday’s meeting)
By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

By the end of this month, Seattle Public Schools Superintendent Dr. Brent Jones will release his proposal for how to close part of a $100 million-plus budget gap by closing/consolidating ~20 elementary schools starting in fall 2025.

This morning, he and other district officials tried to make the case for that forthcoming plan during the third in a series of four community meetings, held in the commons at Chief Sealth International High School.

Though the first of this round of meetings was reported to have been contentious, this one only had one outburst, when an attendee yelled out that Dr. Jones should more aggressively push lawmakers to fix the persistent education-funding shortfall. Also of note, though the meetings were held regionally, there was almost nothing West Seattle-specific this morning, except for the question “Why build a new Alki Elementary when schools (will likely be) closing?”

District chief of staff Bev Redmond opened the meeting by saying the process under way is about “making Seattle Public Schools stronger for years to come.” She handed the microphone over to Dr. Jones, who said the “multi-step process” – which has already unfolded over months before even getting to a list of specific schools is about “getting from instability to stability.” The latter referred primarily to finances, he added, blaming factors from “budgets not fully funded” to inflation to enrollment decline, and saying other districts are experiencing similar problems.

A recap of the budget woes started with a note that “school consolidations” were mentioned as “a potential fiscal stabilization strategy” as early as January 2023. Jones said the balanced budget plan would be presented to the board this month. “We’re at a decision point” – and he contended that keeping all schools open would lead to staff cuts and class-size increases, as well as re-negotiating contracts and cutting or eliminating a variety of programs including athletics and preschool. Closures/consolidations would avoid all that, he said.

Another slide went on to contend that “stability” would lead to “sustainability” for multiple services and programs.

Right now SPS has 48,000 students. 23,000 are K-5 students in 70 schools. The new plan would put them in 50 sites “evenly distributed, about 10 per region” starting in 2025-26. The resulting system would among other things “efficiently utilize building capacity.”

The new model “will have fewer buildings” with “more students but will not be overcrowded,” and “schools not in use will be secured and repurposed until needed again.” Jones promised, “We’re not going to sell off our schools.”

He recapped the summary of feedback from last year’s meetings, which asked attendees what they thought “a well-resourced school” should have. Some current schools might seem well-resourced but “they’re not well-resourced with stable funding” – the resources might be thanks to ‘generous donors,” for example.

He showed a slide breaking down the typical resources for elementaries of various sizes – one with 515 students would have three to five teachers per grade level while 165-student schools might have 1 or 2 teachers per grade level. (The chart still notably shows only 2 days per week with a nurse, even for the largest schools.)

“Too many schools that serve our youngest scholars are under-enrolled,” another slide declared.

Regarding how they’re deciding which schools to propose for closure/consolidation: “We have several scenarios that we’re working on right now,” Jones said, adding that what will be presented to the School Board later this month will be a “preliminary recommendation.” Public review would ensue June-November, including “site hearings.”

Yes, it’ll be disruptive, but teachers and administrators will get through – Dr. Jones told an anecdote he’s reported to have shared at other versions of this meeting, about changing schools multiple times as a child. “I’m inviting you all to come on this journey with us.” He insisted there’s no other option – “if there was (another) way, we would have already put it on the table.”

After his ~20-minute presentation, it was time for a “lightly facilitated” table discussion. People were invited to write questions on cards and said they would be taken to a panel.

The table we observed was facilitated by assistant superintendent Ted Howard, who said he’s the district’s “chief accountability officer.” (Previously, his experience included 16 years as principal of Garfield High School.) Rather than launching into Q/A, though, he launched into a speech to the table. In it, he continued trying to make the case for closures/consolidations. First he noted in speaking to the table that “schools are being asked to do a lot more” and said this is an “exciting” opportunity for community members to respond to the question of “what would you like to see” in schools. He said it’s a “deep” conversation – that schools have never been fully funded. Yes, McCleary helped, but school funding, he said, is hindered by a “cap” on how much levies can raise. He told the table that they can go online to look up the funding provided to their individual schools of interest. If smaller schools aren’t generating enough funding to support what they need to do, supplementary funding has to be taken from larger schools to keep those smaller ones open. He said the idea of restructuring SPS actually dates back to 1990, “when Gary Locke [then governor] said Seattle Public Schools needs to restructure.” Then he went through what the district already has done to try to achieve fiscal stability – again under the constrictions of what the state allows them to do.

“How does closing a school actually save money?” one participant asked. Personnel cuts, Howard said, and “mothballing” the buildings. He said the projection is that they can save half a million to $2 million per building. OK, said another participant, even at $2 million per school, that’s $40 million savings, but the deficit is $105 million, so what else will be done? Miscellaneous savings, Howard said, but the attendee pressed the point. It’s all “a moving target.” Eventually “will we lose some middle schools? Possibly. Will we lose some high schools? Possibly.” Another attendee asked about option (K-8) schools – she knew of one with a 60-student waitlist. Their fate depends on what the “needs and wants” identified by the community are. Another attendee questioned the plan to just “mothball” the closed schools – what about using them to generate income? she asked. They’re not looking at that, yet, Howard said.

Contiuing on that topic, one attendee wondered how the district is going to deal with “the blight” of closed buildings and how it’s going to “protect” the community. Howard said that would be a question for chief operating officer Fred Podesta.

Who makes the final decision? The board. The superintendent’s plan is “just a proposal,” Howard emphasized. Their final vote would be in October. “At the end of this they could say ‘we’re not doing it’,” he added. He also noted that the funding issue is ultimately up to state legislators – and their funding decisions can ultimately affect a lot of societal issues.

Some of what was discussed at our table was repeated when everyone reconvened into an audience as a panel of district officials sat at the front of the room and answered written questions. From left in the photo above are Podesta, Dr. Jones, assistant superintendent of finance Dr. Kurt Buttleman, central region executive director of schools Dr. James Mercer, executive operations director Dr. Marni Campbell.

The first question read included a plea: “Please make a plan to build something better.” Dr. Jones replied, “That’s the intent of this effort. … This is about the students’ experience … that’s a change for us … our new governance policy has the board focused on student outcomes.” He insisted “we’re putting the students’ experience first and foremost in how we make decisions.”

QUESTION: Will we get any transparency in what other options have been considered outside of closing and consolidating schools? Dr. Jones said they’d looked at other things and concluded no other “comprehensive option” but did not describe what else they’d looked at. “We believe in this,” he said. “This is frankly our best thinking.” Dr. Buttleman said an FAQ on the district website had more details on what else could save money “around class sizes and other options.”

QUESTION: Will the district show detailed analysis of how these savings would be ahieved, or is it just through staffing savings? Dr. Buttleman said that when Dr. Jones’s proposal is presented, it’ll have specifics on how much would save per school. He said some info had been added to the website last night. He added that about two-thirds of building savings would be maintenance, utilities, food services, etc.

QUESTION: What will happen with schools that are closing and what are the conditions of the closing schools? Podesta replied that building conditions are (part of how they’re making decisions) – some are in bad condition or they’re small buildings. He said there’ll be a short-term plan and long-term plan – former will keep all the buildings, an interim use will be identified – “we’ll maintain all the buildings, maintain all the grounds, we understand (many are community recreation spots)” – fields are in demand. “We’ll assess each site and see if we need long term to keep in our inventory and (what’s the highest best use) … if we need to bring more schools (back) online in the future” although they feel they’ll still have room for growth after closures because the schools would only be 85% used.

QUESTION: How did option schools factor in? Dr. Campbell said, “They are part of the consideration.” – “Do you see that as a good consideration or a bad consideration?” calls out one guy – “They are on the table,” she reiterated.

QUESTION: What can the school board do with the plan? They can amend the plan or reject the plan, says Dr. Jones.

QUESTION: Will each student get (support staff)? Buttleman said the Weighted Staffing Standards drive that – it would be “coming out of their work as to how the new staffing would look. … Some schools would have a fulltime nurse but not all schools.” Jones added, “This whole plan is predicated on having adequate support for our students.”

QUESTION: What does “inclusive learning” look like? Campbell defined that as appropriate staffing and facilities. She said collaboration between staff is important.

QUESTION: After school closures, will the budget be rebalanced? If not, what’s the next plan? No, it will not be balanced, replied Jones, “but we’ll be in a stronger position.” More cuts are likely. “We’ll probably have about a $40 million gap still, going into 2025-26” and they’d be working with the Legislature.

QUESTION: Why are we building a new school, Alki Elementary, when we are closing schools? Podesta said, “We need to consider building conditions … SPS, if we pursue this proposal, will still be operating 50 elementary schools … we need to have the capacity so that this level of service can be supported in all neighborhoods.”

QUESTION: Are you considering consolidating middle and high schools? Jones replied, “Maybe years down the road, but this is enough for us to do right now.” Campbell added, “We’re right-sizing the elementary level of our district (and that might help the balancing of middle schools).”

QUESTION: Now we know multilingual teaching is an asset. How will SPS continue supporting dual-language programming? Campbell agreed it’s an asset: “We’ll continue to have dual language programming through our district. We’re looking at spaces where it’s not accessible to our heritage speakers, so in our new system, we’re making sure it’s built into the design of our system.” Dr. Jones added that racial equity/analysis is built into everything – “we do this, ongoing.”

QUESTION: What engagement if any has there been with state legislators? Dr. Jones said they meet with a state legislative delegation. “Our legislative delegation has been responsive … but we need you all to speak boldly (to them) about what SPS needs … if (school closures) is not an alarm going off, I don’t know what is.” Talk to them about ensuring that “basic education is funded,” he added. “Our legislators are listening to us,” but “we probably need to push even harder.” At that point someone shouted, “are you willing to do that publicly?” and another person shouted “Tax the rich!” Dr. Jones said he would lobby. That’s not enough, someone called out, saying Jones should call a news conference and make demands. Dr. Jones said, “I don’t know about ‘tax the rich’ and all that” and the attendee retorted, “It’s either tax the rich or tax working-class people.” Buttleman interjected that “engagement is happening” – he is meeting with legislators too.

QUESTION: What if the next levies don’t pass – will there be additional onsolidation? Jones said they’re not taking passage for granted but we are not factoring in a levy failure either: “That would be devastating to us. It’s essential for us.” Levy passage is part of “stability,” he added. “We have to pass our levies just to keep the lights on.”

QUESTION: Elaborate on how equity lens toolkit is being used to shape these decisions. Jones said “that’s happening across the board.” He acknowledges that the district’s been asked to “show your work” and says they’ll try harder to do that. Campbell said smaller schools are already feeling pain (of resource shortages) before any closures, so that needs to be considered. They have to do a demographic impact analysis of any changes. If they discovered a disproportionate impact on students of color or furthest from educational justice, “we have moved off that.”

QUESTION: Transportation plan? That will follow any finalized closure list.

QUESTION: New boundaries? Campbell said that when they have a “possible plan,” they’ll have an “address lookup” online.

At that point, with a few minutes left in the meeting’s planned hour-and-a-half window, Dr. Jones asked attendees if the questions they’d been answering are the ones attendees wanted to have answered. No objections. He invited a few more questions, at which point a child ran up and presented him with one.

QUESTION: What’s a real life example of a well resourced school? Jones said, “I don’t know if we have a single well-resourced school but we want a system of them.”

To the question of how people could help in the decisionmaking process, Podesta said they would appreciate feedback on the previously presented ‘guiding principles” that they’re using to “refine and finalize” a recommendation.

Most of the participating administrators were seen lingering to talk one-on-one with attendees.

WHAT’S NEXT: The last meeting in this series will be online, Tuesday (June 4) at 6 pm, with the link to appear on this page sometime Monday. The date for Dr. Jones’s presentation of recommendations has not been announced beyond repeated promises that it’ll happen sometime this month. The board has one regular meeting scheduled this month, on June 10. … Also of note, if you want to talk with the school board director for West Seattle/South Park about this or any other topic, Gina Topp‘s next community meeting is next Saturday, June 8, 1 pm at High Point Library (3411 SW Raymond).