The most recent minutes from the school board’s rezoning meetings have been released and they show mixed support for proposals to split the schools in the southern part of the Upper West Side in a way that would make them less segregated.
A parents group and the school leadership team at PS 191 have backed proposals that would pair public schools so that one would educate pre-K to 2nd grade, another would educate 3rd through 5th and a third (under one scenario) would hold a middle school with 6th-8th graders.
This issue is complicated and we went to greater lengths to explain the rezoning here. The Department of Education’s original rezoning plan has already been rejected, but talks are continuing. The zoning committee for CEC3 (the school board) meets Monday, Nov. 16 at 6 p.m. at the Joan of Arc Complex (154 West 93rd street) to continue the discussion.
One reason for the pairing proposals is that PS 199 and PS 191 are now essentially segregated schools, with 191 serving mostly black and Hispanic children and 199 serving mostly white and Asian students.
A school leadership team made up of staff and parents at PS 191 supports a plan that would pair PS 191 with PS 342, which is under construction at the base of a luxury residential building on 61st street and set to open in 2018. Students would attend one school for pre-K to 2nd grade and the other for 3-5.
A separate parents group thinks that 191, 342 and 199 could all be included in a “pairing” (or tripling?) plan. But the school leadership team at 199 doesn’t support changing 199 from a K-5 school: “Liz Sutherland, Co-Chair of the PS199 SLT, reiterated that PS199 wants to keep its K-5 grade structure intact, that it does not support the proposed three-school pairing of grades,” the minutes note.
The school board plans to recommend that any school pairing plans would not go into effect in the upcoming school year. For next year, it looks like the board may recommend that PS 452 on 77th street take more students, a partial stopgap solution to overcrowding at PS 199. See the two sets of minutes, and the agenda for Monday’s meeting below.
151106 Zoning Committee Minutes-2 by westsiderag
151112 Zoning Subcommittee on Grade Pairing DRAFT by westsiderag
These “pairing” proposals are incomprehensible nonsense.
Basically, the school board is avoiding the heart of the matter – no PS 199 parent wants their kid in a school with poor minority kids from the projects.
However, nobody – no school board member, no board of education employee, no politician, no parent – will say this out loud.
Sherman,
You say “no PS 199 parent wants their kid in a school with poor minority kids from the projects.”
You are wrong. But the question is how to do it while keeping 199 great.
How do you think it should be done?
Brandon,
You ask “What are the clear geographic reasons for the newly proposed zones?”
There is little valid geographic reason for the zone that was proposed by the DOE. The proposed zone was gerrymandering to decrease crowding at 199 and to enable Trump Place to displace the older buildings in the current 199 zone.
Kudos to CEC3 for rejecting that offensive proposed zone. I hope it’s off the table forever.
Wow. This is a disgusting sentiment. It would also leave PS 199 wide open to a lawsuit they would lose, with good reason.
It may not be nice, but I completely agree with Sherman. Why would they have drawn the zones the way they did, if not to segregate. And why are no Trump Tower families (closer to 191) zoned for that school?
Sailgirl,
You ask “Why would they have drawn the zones the way they did, if not to segregate?”
There are clear geographical reasons for the current zoning. These are not gerrymandered lines. These are geographical lines. So it’s wrong to jump to the conclusion that the lines were created because of race. Did race play a role in it? I wouldn’t doubt it. But race does not appear to be the prime factor in the current zoning lines.
That being said, integration of some sort would be a good thing. But lets not throw the baby away with the bathwater.
Sailgirl,
I apologize; I misunderstood your (rhetorical) question. I thought you were referring to the current zone, not the proposed zone.
The proposed zone (recently rejected by CEC3) is bad, very bad.
J,
What are the clear geographic reasons for the newly proposed zones that put CPW to Amsterdam south of 68th in the 191 zone while extending the 199 zone all the way west? I don’t think it’s racial segregation since both populations will be mostly while but I don’t see how it makes any sense geographically.
The demographics of the PS191 zone are not much different than the demographics of PS199. There was a survey that showed that the market rents and sale prices were actually higher in the191 zone than the 199 zone.The schools were paired for 20 years. When they were unpaired in the early 80s, it was PS199 that was in danger of closing due to underenrollment.
Under the able leadership of Gary Goldstein and Carol Stock, the school was able to attract parents first from all over the West side and then its zone.
This isn’t a simple question of redrawing lines but how does one mobilize families to revitalize a school?
Angeline,
You write: “The schools were paired for 20 years. When they were unpaired in the early 80s, it was PS199 that was in danger of closing due to under-enrollment.”
I wonder about the previous failed pairing of 191 with 199. Why did it fail? Perhaps if we knew more about it, we could learn from our mistakes and not repeat them. Perhaps we could create something that, this time, won’t fail.
If DOE or CEC3 has studied the past failure, they have not publicized it.
I wish DOE or CEC3 or somebody would educate us all about it.
Asking parents to have blind faith in DOE is asking too much.
Angeline,
Don’t lecture me about the schools. Go teach in The Bronx like I did. And my son did. And my wife taught in Washington Heights.
Your anecdotes are completely lost on me. You can dazzle your 199 supporters with dollar/ child being spent at PS 191, but you know that is because there are more techers/child needed in a high needs school.
Your “research” is lost on me. I did the teaching. I know what you are up to.
Who said anything about love? The PS199 principal of the 80s and 90s. went to actively recruit students inside and outside zone. At least one teacher who went out to hand out flyers is still teaching at the school.
Please read about PS172, high poverty school. Phenomenal results with little fundraising or extras. No library. The principal (tenure >20 years) developed a strategy that works.
“A fairer news story should read something like this – PS191 which is squarely in a residential zone of mainly luxury housing has not succeeded in attracting students outside the Amsterdam houses.” – Angeline
You and others seem to receive such a sense of satisfaction in saying that PS 191 is a failure, while PS 199 has, despite overwhelming conditions, been such a great success. And it’s because of us, the extraordinary parents who love our children in the way that no other parent has ever, or can ever, do.
That Narrative is sickening and a bit obvious. But I know, the newspapers and “other” people are so wrong.
The press exaggerates to make a point and sell copy. Anyone who lives in the area knows that the low-rise Amsterdam houses is a small fraction of the housing units between 60th and 66th (roughly the zoning line). A fairer news story should read something like this – PS191 which is squarely in a residential zone of mainly luxury housing has not succeeded in attracting students outside the Amsterdam houses.
There is no school east of Amsterdam between 76 and 60. So not sure how to draw the lines to fit that fact.
Angeline,
Aren’t you convieniently omiting something?
“P.S. 199 is a top-ranked school surrounded by pricey residential buildings. P.S. 191, which serves many students from the Amsterdam Houses, has struggled low test scores and a “persistently dangerous” designation by the state.”
from “A Tale of Two Schools” – Chalkbeat
I think PS 199 is saying this loud and clear with their line about wanting to keep their k-5 designation. They aren’t interested in being part of the larger community.
P.S. 199 politics has made the school an embarrassment to our otherwise decent UWS.
From the NY Post:
“It also widens the gulf between the haves and have-nots.
“Those things should be equal in all schools,” said Kajsa Reaves, PTA president of PS 191 on the Upper West Side. “I do think it’s quite unfair.”
Reaves says her group struggled to raise only $24,000 last year — and is saving to give the school a library. PS 191 serves families in nearby public housing and some homeless shelters.
Nine blocks away, PS 199 takes kids from the luxury Trump Place complex. That PTA raked in $812,500 in 2013-14 for a science teacher, aides and visits from a chef to recommend healthy lunches.”
PS 199 an embarrassment?
Ha!
That’s a good one!
“A Tale of Two Schools” https://ny.chalkbeat.org/2015/10/19/for-two-sharply-divided-manhattan-schools-an-uncertain-path-to-integration/#.VkodMFWrTnA
“It is as though the neighborhood were divided by an invisible wall.” https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/28/nyregion/manhattan-rezoning-fight-involves-a-school-called-persistently-dangerous.html?_r=0
“It also widens the gulf between the haves and have-nots.” https://nypost.com/2015/11/15/school-ptas-soak-rich-parents-for-10000-donations/
Hey J – just keep the Narritive going in the bubble, someone’s gotta believe in it.
I’m for integration, Dannyboy, and for changing the current zoning system to meet that end. So I’m not sure what “narrative” you’re talking about.
Are you talking about my taking offense at your calling people selfish and elitist because we want to send our kids to good schools?
Are you talking about my desire to keep 199 a good school while imposing integration with the “have-nots”?
Are you talking about my defense of 199 in the face of your villainization?
In case you need a reminder, 199 is what every school strives to be. 191 is, sadly, an embarrassment to NYC. I hope we can fix 191, for the sake of its students. They deserve a great school like 199.
J,
Again you write Comments that attribute words to me that I have never spoken. I have never written anything objecting you wanting good schools for your children (that would be mean, don’tya think?).
I have never Commented at all about “about [your] desire to keep 199 a good school while imposing integration with the “have-nots””
But I have objected to your shameful attitude when you write: “In case you need a reminder, 199 is what every school strives to be. 191 is, sadly, an embarrassment to NYC.”
Shame on you.
Residents who live in Trump Place should be sending their kids to private school (unless they spent all their money by living in Trump Place).
With all this segregation / desegregation discussion, whatever happened to the overcrowding issue, or did I miss that portion?
“Residents at Trump should be sending their kids to private school.”. That is a ridiculous statement. You can fault the city for not planning correctly for more students when the allowed the buildings, but how can you fault a family for buying/renting near the River over some other part of the 199 zone (which could easily be the same or higher cost)?
It is interesting how wealth has become the determinant of the quality of education that a child receives in our “Community” Education Council.
Wealth, privilege, entitlement…
J –
Believe it or not, this Blog is not “The 199 Glows Report”, rather it is a blog concerned with the Upper West Side, so no one needs to “try to convince us that we want a split system. That would be a more productive path.”
The very productive path that I walk is very different from the disfunctional 199 Glows. I find it more than surprising now, I now find this whole 199 behavior an embarrassment to the UWS.
The newspapers are filled with this debacle. The 199 Attitude is being scorned.
So, stop creating Narritives to tell yourselves, and act like a REAL UWSer.
Dannyboy,
When the person who humorously called himself thepipesthepipesarecalling (no, it wasn’t me) said “i’m still waiting for dannyboy to post something of substance, rather than rant like an old, disgruntled man” he probably would like more from you than your voicing your support for the split-site proposal.
The issue is complex and nuanced. If parents don’t feel confident about their kids’ schools, then they will find other schools for their kids to attend. If too many parents find other schools for their kids, then 199, 191, and 342 will all fail.
Calling parents “elitist” and “selfish” misses the point. The point is the DOE must make parents feel confident about the schools. If not, the schools will fail. The very people that you call “elitist” and “selfish” are the very people upon which the plan that you support depends. So, perhaps try to convince us that we want a split system. That would be a more productive path.
I will again repost one of my recent Comments, which includes a proper solution to your narrowmindedness:
“dannyboy says:
November 15, 2015 at 5:17 pm
I enjoy reading the West Side Rag and Comments because I have a commitment to our neighborhood. That said, I find these PS 199 Comments really surprising, and have been getting a real education on what many of my neighbors are thinking. Angeline, you point out Real Estate as a real driver for parents. Others have pointed to race. And on it goes.
What I find surprising is that there seems to be more divisions separating parents from building up schools for their children, than cooperation.
“That leaves me supporting the Split-Siting proposal. That would encourage the neighborhood to cooperate for all the children.”
Your anonymous Ageism is apparant.
i’m still waiting for dannyboy to post something of substance, rather than rant like an old, disgruntled man. it’s easy to criticize. how about proposing any solutions…any at all.
NY State guarantees every kid a free education. The DOE under-funds the schools. Parents are left to make up the difference. PS 199 has enough families with resources to fill in the gap by paying for things the DOE should be providing. PS 191 does not. The current system is messed up. It penalizes kids because of where they live There aren’t enough wealthy families who live near and send their kids to 191 to pay for everything the kids at 191 need.
Maybe an issue we should be talking about is that ALL parents want their kids to go to a school with a budget for basic things like libraries and teaching aides and if the DOE provided these things to all of the schools, you’d have fewer parents segregating themselves and doing whatever they can to they can live in the part of the district where they know someone else with resources will pay to make sure that their kids get basic resources.
Another is that, whatever anyone says, the UWS is segregated in terms of who lives where and we are all part of the problem. Whatever the reason, most buildings on the UWS are predominantly white which doesn’t make sense unless we are segregating ourselves because the population of this city is a lot less than 50% white.
“if the DOE provided these things to all of the schools, you’d have fewer parents segregating themselves”
This is the most brazen rationale for school segregation that I have ever read.
But, I should heve been tipped off by the “Concerned citizen” nom de plume.
Sadly , , , this issue of zoning and over crowded schools will rapidly be get worse in the next 3-15 years unless our local officials start putting an end to the over development of the UWS.
As I have been ‘complaining’ for the last 10 years, the approval committees are failing to take into account the longer term side effects of these new and upcoming residential projects. They are impacting our infrastructure and community – train service; water/sewer lines; utilities; vehicle congestion; and more importantly, our schools!
For example, the below new high rises are expected to be filling up with additional residents within a 4 square block area within the next 2-3 years:
SE Corner of 80th and B’way
79 Street bewteen B’way and Amsterdam
TWO on 77 Street between B’way and Amsterdam
260 West 78 Street is coming up for approval (demo and replace with a residential bldg.)
Instead of building more residential buildings, the city should be enticing developers into building more schools. Perhaps with some incentives so that everyone wins (developer and community).
Sad indeed, AC.
The city clearly doesn’t give preference to children (money and developers come first) yet some people expect us to put community before our own kids. Clearly we must look out for our own kids; the city doesn’t do it for us.
J –
I feel yuo. A minute ago it was the dastardly DOE that required you to consider only your little one, to the exclusion to other children.
Now it’s the dastardly City that requires you to protect your little one, to the exclusion of other children.
I’m seeing a pattern to your rationalizations.
In discussions on these message boards and in person communication, parents from 199 argue that “I am just doing what’s best for my child”. and at first glance it is hard to argue with such sentiment. However, if full on segregation of schools is what is best for your child … And don’t say it is not about Race because “I would have no problem having wealthy minority families ta 199”. If a policy disproportionately affects race (I just don’t want project kids regardless of race, yet such kids are disproportionately minorities), then yes by de facto it is race; even if that is not your intent.
And furthermore, if you are just doing what is best for YOUR child, then you should have no qualms about others fighting just as hard for doing what is right for THEIR child, even if it means breaking up YOUR school.
Southern Manifest,
Yes, public housing policies create de facto racism. Yet this doesn’t mean that an avoidance of public housing is racist.
And many (most?) of us don’t want segregated schools. We want integrated schools that are good. If that’s not available to us, then we’d settle for segregated schools that are good. But we’d prefer integrated schools that are good.
And yes, I have no qualms about others fighting just as hard for doing what is right for THEIR child. We should all be fighting for our children.
If they go with the idea of pairing 191 with the new school and leaving 199 alone, is the rezoning map that was circulating a few weeks ago still in play? That would mean children from 68th and CPW would walk almost a mile to 342 (Google tells me it’s .9 miles) instead of to the much closer 199, while children along Riverside Blvd which would be closer to 342 would still go to 199. This doesn’t make sense geographically. The public deserves to know what the methodology in drawing the zoning lines is.
Brandon,
The methodology that is being used is the Trump Plaza people have their talons dug into the DOE while people in the long-established buildings do not.
The zoning proposed by the DOE (recently rejected by CEC3) is an affront.
You want affront?
Attend a couple of CEC3 Zoning Committee meetings. That will blow you away!
We shouldn’t fault anyone for trying to do the best for their kids. Given that most of the neighborhood except the Amsterdam Houses have the means to get kids into a AT&T, Success Academy, parochial or private school or move to the burbs to avoid 191 the new plan can’t impact only a few families or they’ll find other options. They can’t, for example, allow siblings to go to 199 for l while others in their building go to 191 or a new shared solution. The only thing that will work is a plan that impacts everyone in the 199 and 191 zones. 200 families won’t be able to find other options by September. They’ll attend a new paired school because they won’t have another option. Because the UMC kids will by far outnumber the LMC kids the school will,eventually, thrive. That eventually will happen before the all-important 4th grade tests. I’m not suggesting there won’t be a lot of stress on the parents walking their 4/5 year olds to the new paired school on those first days. In the long run these kids will benefit from having been in a more diverse environment than ps 199 can offer.
Diane,
I’m not sure you’re correct when you say “families won’t be able to find other options by September [and] they’ll attend a new paired school because they won’t have another option.”
I’m quite sure many families will find other options if they don’t feel confident that their zoned school is good.
Yes, you are right when you say “in the long run these kids will benefit from having been in a more diverse environment than ps 199 can offer.”
But many people won’t sent their kids to school if they’re not confident it’s a good school.
I just think the numbers will make it difficult to impossible for families to find other options. That is what people do today when 25 or so kids don’t get in from the 199 waitlist. But if all 150 K students who would be lucky enough to get 199 seats, plus the 25 who wouldn’t have, are thrown into the mix with the 35 incoming 191 k students there won’t be enough open spots at charters and privates for them. Some of those people may move to the suburbs, and the younger students may be redshirted for a year while parents find an alternative but I think a fair number of the 175 children would end up enrolled in the paired school. The privates and charters simply don’t have that many empty seats.
Diane,
I’m sure you’re right when you say “I think a fair number of the 175 children would end up enrolled in the paired school.”
But how many?
How many parents will send their kids to the paired school? It depends on how the paired school is perceived. If the DOE just simply draws some zoning lines and direct parents to send their kids to this or that school, without creating a situation where parents feel good about the school, I think we will see a lot of flight.
(And you are forgetting another flight avenue; for many of us, it’s not so hard to move to a different NYC neighborhood.)
So, the mix between the “haves” and the “have nots” in the paired school could reach a bad tipping point.
In short, the DOE has to do more than draw zoning lines and command us to send our kids to this or that school. Because many of us won’t listen to the DOE unless we feel good about it.
Would you?
The awesomely ironic part is that if 199 hadn’t fought so hard to try to keep wait listed families out and hadn’t made overcrowding such a big issue, then any discussion of pairing or destroying 199 would have never happened.
199 complained, shot down every potential solution (admittedly none were great) except for making 199 even more exclusive.
So while this plan may not happen, any changes to 199 that they are so adverse to are a product of their own doing.
(The stories really started with the wait list fiasco, which only exposed the segregation of 191/199).
Southern Manifesto,
What could 199 have done?
I mean this question sincerely, not rhetorically.
What could 199 have done that would have prevented the current situation?
Attend a “Community” Education Council or a “Community” Zoning Committee ‘District 3’ Meeting for an eyeful.
I can only compare it to a Co-op Board Meeting in an exclusibe building, where the President is in cahoots with the contractors.
And anyone wonders why access to 199 is sealed off, while every applicant is sent to 191?
Take a look at the Co-op Board.
They’ve co-opted your Public School as if it’s their exclusive posession.
Dannyboy,
You insinuate that CEC3 is crooked.
Do you care to provide any support for your insinuation? Or provide some specific examples, at least?
Or is this just another one of your wasteful rants that we’re all so tired of seeing?
J,
I too can agree that this has been wasteful.
I wish you all the luck in the world. I suggest you attend the Zoning Committee and CEC Meetings for yourself, especially the “Special Calendar Meetings” (off the schedule) called for voting.
Alternatively, you can just believe that some DOE Monster is making your life so unpredictable. Easy way out.
But, as for me wasting your time, just let’s leave it alone. I don’t need your grief. My family seemed to get through just fine: Columbia Professional Schools, Pratt Institute, Berkeley Law. You know if you all attend the NYC Specialized High Schools, you do get a good education.
Good luck.
Dannyboy,
Again I ask you to explain what you mean when you insinuate that CEC3 is crooked.
Your response telling me to attend CEC3 meetings for myself is not helpful. I indeed have attended CEC3 meetings. I haven’t seen anything suggesting crookedness. The board seems open minded, professional, and fairly sensitive, as far as I can tell. But I’m sure I’m missing something, as it’s hard to know what goes on behind the scenes.
If you know anything about CEC3 crookedness, please tell us what it is. Otherwise, your insinuations are not helpful.
As for your good wishes for me and my family, thank you.