No Busing for Overflow Kindergarteners in Queens

See email exchange between Marge Kolb, head of the Presidents council in D24 in Queens, and Kathleen Grimm of DOE below.

To this day, DOE has refused to put the placement of G and T classes through any public process for community input, leading to flawed decision-making and the awful outcome described below, with parents having to spend hours transporting their Kindergarten children to schools miles away from their zoned schools – with no busing provided.

As Marge says, "DOE cannot pretend to be 'well-managed' and continue to perpetrate these kind of harms upon parents and children."

___

From: MKolbcorr@aol.com [mailto:MKolbcorr@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 10:48 AM
To: Klein Joel I.
Cc: Fighetti Gabriela; Sternberg Marc; dmytrocec24@yahoo.com ; Roseann Darche; nickcec24@aol.com ; Chan Madelene
Subject: No Busing for Overflow Kindergarteners?

Dear Chancellor Klein:

I recently called the District 24 office to inquire about the schools in our district with capped kindergartens (which I believe, currently number 6 or 7 schools). I was shocked to learn that busing has still NOT been arranged for 10-12 Kindergarten students from PS 12 in northern Woodside who were offered seats LAST MAY at PS 128 in Middle Village. I was told that one parent may be walking the 4.5 mile round trip to get her child to school each day (twice! in the morning and afternoon) and another parent may be close to losing her job because of the time involved in delivering and picking up her child from school . Parents were initially (and kindly) given metrocards by the PS 128 principal so they could make their way by public bus with their children, but he has since had to stop providing these due to the expense, so now parents are expected to pay their own way (and take two buses) to get their children to school each day. Please note that PS 12 has a free lunch rate of 74% and Limited English Proficiency of 34% - this is primarily an immigrant population being served.

At the September 28 D24 CEC meeting, Gabby Fighetti from the Portfolio division stated that she had just learned of this situation and would immediately take action. Now, weeks later I am told by the D24 office that these students will not be able to be offered busing. This is unacceptable!

I find it absolutely appalling that instead of offering PS 12 students seats at PS 229, which is the next school zone to the south, the DOE instead placed a brand-new 1^st grade G&T class at PS 229 which could have instead been placed at the new PS 330 (at IS 73) which opened this year with a Kindergarten G&T. The class at PS 229 draws most of its students from outside the school zone, and thus, had it not been opened, PS 229 might very well have been able to take the overflow from PS 12 (as it took overflow from PS 143 last year).

This is just another example of why the centralization of decisions such as this is detrimental to districts. The right hand at Central does not know what the left hand is doing. You have CEC and Presidents’ Council leadership who have years of experience in the district and a perfectly competent District Superintendent on the ground, yet were any of us consulted in advance about these issues? No!

I would like an immediate report as to what is being done to get transportation for the affected students. In the meantime I will alert the local elected officials to this situation.

Marge Kolb

President, D24 Presidents’ Council

___

From: Grimm Kathleen [mailto:KGrimm@schools.nyc.gov]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 4:11 PM
To: MKolbcorr@aol.com
Cc: Fighetti Gabriela; Sternberg Marc; Chan Madelene; Shear Jeffrey; Goldstein Eric
Subject: FW: No Busing for Overflow Kindergarteners?

Marge,

I am sorry for any frustration here, but PS 12 is a school that does not have busing. Children who are eligible can continue to receive MetroCards, but we cannot provide them to parents. I wish that I could be more help here.

Kathleen

___

From: MKolbcorr@aol.com [mailto:MKolbcorr@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:01 PM
To: KGrimm@schools.nyc.gov
Cc: GFighetti@schools.nyc.gov; MSternberg@schools.nyc.gov; MChan2@schools.nyc.gov; JShear@schools.nyc.gov; EGoldstein@schools.nyc.gov; dmytrocec24@yahoo.com; rdarche@queensbp.org
Subject: Re: FW: No Busing for Overflow Kindergarteners?

Dear Ms. Grimm:

Your information is incorrect. PS 12 HAS busing, it is PS 128 that does not, and inasmuch as DOE has offered seats to overflow students from PS 12 to attend PS 128 (AS LONG AGO AS LAST MAY!!!) it is incumbent upon the DOE to provide transportation to those students.

How come your reply to me does not address the fact that PS 12 parents were led to believe that they would receive busing or that seats at PS 229 (much closer to PS 12 than PS 128 is) were not offered but were instead slotted for a NEW G&T 1st grade class which could just as easily have been located at the new PS 330 which was already getting a NEW G&T kindergarten class?

DOE cannot pretend to be "well-managed" and continue to perpetrate these kinds of harms upon parents and children.

I already have The Daily News interested in this story and the local City Councilmember, Jimmy Van Bramer has been apprised, so I expect a better answer from you.

Marge Kolb

President, D24 Presidents' Council

Is there adequate public review for charter schools? Letter from Marge Kolb

Here is a letter to the New York State Board of Regents from Marge Kolb, a parent leader in Queens. It points out that while state law requires a public review process by members of the community before the applications of charter schools are approved, in NYC this occurring without sufficient notice and information being disclosed to parents.

At the September Community Education Council meeting in D24 (Queens) the prospective Principal and AP for La Cima, a proposed charter school, made a public presentation. I am a former member of that CEC and the current D24 designee to CPAC. I was at the La Cima presentation and I have the following comments:

• I believe there is a requirement under state law that prospective charter schools seek public opinion. If that was what was trying to be accomplished at the September CEC meeting, I must point out that there was not adequate notice given to the "public." The CEC agenda only listed an item under the District Superintendent's monthly report which said "presentation regarding charter schools by DOE officials." It did NOT say that it was a public hearing or request for public input regarding a new charter school proposed for Jackson Heights or Corona.

Consequently, affected parties from those neighborhoods were not put on notice. For this reason, I believe this charter school must be heard from again at a future CEC meeting. (In fact, I met some PTA members from a Corona school, PS 19, a week after the CEC meeting and they told me that their parent coordinator had told them it wasn't necessary for them to attend CEC meetings!)

• I object to this charter school being placed in any current or future DOE facility in D24. If the school organizers are able to find their own space, so be it, but inasmuch as D24 is one of the most overcrowded districts in NYC, especially in the Corona area, any use of public school space for a charter school - which can cap class size and overall enrollment and accept students from outside the school zone (and indeed, outside the district) would only serve to increase overcrowding in other area schools. The new school which will open in September 2008 in Corona is already going to be at- or over-capacity accepting students from the two nearby schools (PS 19 and PS 16).

• I didn't think the idea of the La Cima school was particularly unique. The speakers said it would be a dual-language school which celebrates Hispanic culture and seeks to involve parents. PS 19 in Corona already has a dual language program and I believe one of the DOE's core values is to involve parents. Furthermore, I defy anyone to identify a school in D24 which does not "celebrate diversity."

Finally, on a note about dual-language programs, I looked into the question of whether my zoned school, PS 229, could have a dual-language program and was told by the District Superintendent that Central places a cap on the number of such programs that any given district can have. Why would you deny such programs to public schools and then sponsor a Charter School just because it plans such a program?

Thank you for your consideration of the above.

Marge Kolb, Woodside, NY

For more on this issue, see our recent posting on charter schools.