CEC3 Treasurer Lucas Liu speaks at a hearing in July.
The local school board hopes to make crucial decisions this month about the city’s plan to rezone up to 11 Upper West Side schools, and two hearing dates have already been set. With kids about to return to school, many parents who had been away or tuned-out for the summer may be getting their first taste of what’s to come.
The city has floated two plans to rezone the schools. In both plans, PS 191 would move into a new school on 61st and West End in 2017. In one plan, PS 452 would move into PS 191’s old home at 61st and Amsterdam. In the other PS 452 would stay put and a new school would be placed in the old 191. Under both plans, the changes would ripple throughout the district, causing zoning line changes to several other schools too. We last detailed the changes (with maps!) and the rationale here.
Kim Watkins, the chair of the zoning committee, wants the school board to choose one of the two plans by the end of September so that a city board can make decisions on which schools need to be moved, and so that zoning board members can address more specific concerns. The school board, known as CEC3, is expected to vote on the final proposal by late October/early November.
So far, here are the two main sticking points: some parents at PS 452 don’t want to move to the new school, and have sent 212 emails in opposition, with about two dozen people emailing more than once. And people in 165 and 185 West End Avenue are opposing the plan, because they would be zoned out of the PS 199 district, splitting them off from other buildings in the Lincoln Towers complex. That issue drew 111 email complaints.
The hearings are currently scheduled for Saturday Sept. 17 at 1 p.m. and Monday Sept. 19 at 6 p.m. Locations haven’t been set yet. Other meeting dates are in the document below.
We’ve posted an update explaining the latest info from CEC3 below.
160822 Zoning Committee Update by westsiderag on Scribd
“with about two dozen people emailing more than once.”
Talk about expecting ‘extra attention’!
and unequal influence.
Consider yourself lucky you haven’t been to one of these meetings to hear these parents whine in person.
What I find amazing about these school rezoning plans is that the silence is deafening from our politicians.
For instance, in her latest newsletter Helen Rosenthal briefly alluded to the school zoning proposals and simply said she supports a “fair” outcome.
Ridiculous. They’re all cowards who are failing to lead the community that elected them. They all know that whatever position they take on the school zoning will hurt them politically.
Silence is not too out of the ordinary for NYC local politicians. In a few short months the national elections will be over and come January 2017 attention shall focus on the New York City races.
Ms. Rosenthal like the others have studied how the closing of Saint Vincent’s played out for Christine Quinn, and thus have learned how stepping into a volatile local issue can have consequences and repercussions.
If the wind was blowing clearly one way or another it *might* provide some cover; but since leadership is what is needed (read someone sticking their neck out by weighing in on one side or another), don’t expect to hear much if anything at all for the moment.
Exactly, so what’s the safest thing for a politician to do, nothing. If they don’t get involved they can’t get burned one way or another.
Hearings on school rezonings are flashes of lightning that show us what’s in the cave, in this case what UWSers really think about integration when their own children are involved.
99.9% of parents do not DO NOT CARE what color skin a child has. What parents DO CARE about is decreasing the chances of their children being around children who do not share the same idea of respect and civility, family life, etc. Let’s stop trying to integrate based on color and start focusing on integrating based on civility and behavior. Let all the kids who are disruptive go to school with each other and vice versa. Forget about race, let’s focus on behavior.
So you are basically stating that the predominantly black and latino children of P.S. 191 are uncivilized. Yeah that’s not racist at all. You must be part of the .1% that is racist. SMH.
Thank you for proving the point. Other posters are saying the students are uncivilized and happen to be minorities, not because they are minorities. Very big difference. And I am not saying I agree with this point about student behavior at this school – I am just trying to keep this discussion grounded in optimal educational outcomes and away from calling people racists for disagreeing.
SPOT ON, 99.9% of parents DO NOT CARE what color skin a child has.
It is ridiculous that if you say you are concerned about sending your child to PS 191, you are racist and you are opposed to integration. Parents are opposed to sending their child to a school that is failing and is unsafe (regardless of the designation).
It is all about the substandard educational outcomes at PS 191. All parents want is a good educational environment for their children.
So far, Helen Rosenthal’s views on the subject have been outrageous. She is not listening to her constituents who are very opposed to the rezoning plan which splits up many communities including Amsterdam Houses and requires many children to travel great distances. Does this plan really address the needs of the children in PS 191? It appears that she and the DOE would rather sweep the PS 191 issues under the rug by spreading out the children from Amsterdam Houses into several schools so their below standard results are not noticed.
How can Helen think that she knows what is best for other parent’s children when she opted out of public schools and sent her kids to private schools?
Exactly how is Helen Rosenthal going to understand any of these issues if she elected to send her children to private school? What does that say about her feelings for public education in her own district. She is a disgrace and we should all let it be known on election day.
Unfortunately, you’ll never displace Helen Rosenthal.
First of all, she’s an incumbent and the Party never dumps an incumbent, even one who is as ineffectual as Ms Rosenthal has been.
Second, the Party is *certainly* not going to dump someone whose personal wealth allows her to finance her own campaign.
Also, many — if not most — of Ms Rosenthal’s constituents opt, as she did, to send their children to private schools. They have no interest in the public school system or who is in what catchment area. Rosenthal’s lack of interest in where the plebeians send their children to school perfectly mirrors their own.
Finally, for all of the above reasons, no one within the Party will challenge the incumbent. The Other Party won’t waste resources trying to find someone viable to challenge her, and certainly won’t provide support to someone who volunteers.
You elected Helen Rosenthal, folks. Now get used to her. She’s here until she gets bored with it, or tired of holding press conferences at traffic-accident scenes. And there’s no sign of either happening any time soon.
Are you sure it has nothing to do with the substandard educational outcomes at PS 191? Maybe parents just want the best education for their children and aren’t being driven by some racist or classist agenda.
The “substandard educational outcome” has everything to do with the concentration of poverty in that school and not with the administration or the teachers. Do you really think if the numbers were flipped and only 20% of the kids at the school received free lunch, while keeping the same staff, that that outcomes would be the same? They wouldn’t be. What distinguishes a good school from a bad school is the students within it and both proposals include integrating the housing projects for that reason.
Is this your meaning?
boi
a ghetto way of spelling boy
Actually, the CEC, DOE and electeds all received petitions with 880 unique signatures, all in opposition of the proposed rezoning plans. Interesting that wasn’t mentioned in the article.
To both plans, or just one of them? I’m surprised no emails in opposition were recorded for the families who might have to walk up to 10 blocks from the PS87 and PS9 catchment zones to PS84. Or maybe those parents aren’t aware of the larger proposal B that’s in the table.
Actually affects 3 catchment zones: PS87, PS199 and PS9. This is based on the new zones outlined in Proposal B.
Spread the word! This is awful for PS 9!!!
Well, it’s not the entire PS9 catchment zone; only the families west of Columbus.
Is this your meaning?
boi
a ghetto way of spelling boy
The CEC numbers are very stale and were taken a couple of days after we began collecting signatures. We now have more than 1,400 and growing rapidly paper signatures supporting keeping Lincoln Towers together at PS 199.
Race is a distraction here. A few years ago, PS 199 needed more space due to overcrowding. At the time, they shared their building with MS 243. When the PS 199 families asked for space, there was a group of parents from MS 243 that came to public meetings and called the 199 families racist.
Reading the posted CEC3 letter more closely, it seems they want to pick one or the other proposal, implying other proposals are not being considered.
Is there a vote by parents/families across the district, or is this entirely in the hands of the CEC3 representatives? If the latter, what is the process to make our voices heard to influence our presumably elected CEC3 representatives? I’m new to the neighborhood and do not recall being given a choice to cast my vote for an educational representative.
The determined solution for this problem should be the one that positively affects the educational needs of the majority of children. Whichever plan does that should be implemented and move on. There will not be a consensus where one will get 100% agreement for any of the plans so I just wish the people in charge of making this decision would grow a pair and make that decision and stop trying to placate everyone.
I agree but unfortunately they seem to have narrowed it down to two options and neither is particularly good. It seems to me like the people making the decision are unable to have almost any input on the consideration set – they vote on what the DOE gives them. Garbage in, garbage out. Based on my admittedly minimal observations of the meetings, I would put a lot more faith in the board members than the DOE to create an optimal plan, regardless of the definition of optimal.
+1
This is such BS. Leave our schools alone.
The dumbest thing in the world would be to no longer allow the children from 165 and 185 West End Ave., to attend PS 199. These buildings are the very closest to the school and it would separate many of the children who play together in the building playgrounds. To indicate closeness from 185 to the school — you can throw a ball from the front of 185 and it would reach the 199 building. 165 is next door.
The rezoning of students from PS 199 to PS 191 is wrong.
You are cutting of 185 and 165 west end avenue from the rest of the building that makeup Lincoln Towers Community.
Lincoln Towers has historic ties that date back to the 1960’s. It was part of the Urban Renewal Plan conceive in the 1950s.
Volunteer and supplementary financial support to PS 199 has been a factor in making PS199 a success. As a reward you wish to break up the Lincoln Towers. Your misgives may be laudible but you are going about it the wrong way.
Lincoln Towers must not and should not be broken up by school rezoning.
Work harder to make PS 191 a fine school..Give them the resources to give the children enrichment they need. Extra tutoring, smaller classes, one on one help.
Breaking up a our community will not bring improvement in the schools.
DO NOT BREAK UP LINCOLN TOWERS..IT IS A SINGLE ENTITY. A COMMUNITY.
Leonard and Janet – What about the PS 452 families that could potentially be asked to move from the school building on 77th Street to 61st Street? Haven’t those families contributed time, money and resources to help make that school (at that location) as success?
“Haven’t those families contributed time, money and resources to help make that school (at that location) as success?” – Anon
You did not buy rights to a spot in the Building. A Public School is not a Condominium.