Parents (and future students) attend a meeting abut the rezoning plan.
Parents upset by the Upper West Side’s new school zoning lines have appealed the decision to the Department of Education, potentially setting in motion a lawsuit challenging the zones.
The contentious rezoning plan was passed by the Community Education Council parent board on Nov. 22, and went into effect for children applying for Kindergarten for the 2017-2018 school year. Kindergarten registration started Nov. 30. The rezoning affects 11 schools and was meant to reduce overcrowding and add diversity to some schools.
The formal appeal was filed by a law firm called Advocated for Justice, according to Chalkbeat, which first reported the story. The challengers include parents who had been zoned for PS 199 and PS 452, according to Chalkbeat.
“The entire process by which CEC 3 went about handling this latest rezoning plan left District 3 parents so angry and demoralized that many, many parents have lost confidence in their elected leaders,” the appeal says. The appeal also says that the documents that parents previously requested in regards to deliberations over the zoning liens have not been produced, and says open meetings laws were violated.
Laura Barbieri, an attorney representing the parents, told Chalkbeat that she doesn’t expect the appeal to succeed but that it needs to be filed if the parents want to eventually file suit.
A Department of Education spokesman wrote that the DOE it will respond in accordance with city rules.
PS 87 parents should join the challenge, as they face potential overcrowding as a result of moving 452 out of the neighborhood. I have no kids or grandkids, but as a follower of this story, I wonder why the Anderson school — a gifted and talented program, from what I understand, that enrolls students from all over the city, as opposed to a neighborhood school like 452 — was not considered for relocation. It seems to make more sense.
Moving Anderson to the 191 building would mean all the Amsterdam Houses kids are still zoned for 191. It would be in the shiny new building but the school would still have more than a fair share of families of limited means, without college educated parents, many where English is a second language. The plan that has been accepted will split these kids into three schools. It is better for the community.
And let’s not forget that the PS 452 administration asked to move. They want their own building that was built with small children in mind.
“..designed with small children in mind.” Meaning what, exactly? We heard Scott Parker say this many times, meanwhile the only example he ever articulated was that some of the toilets would be smaller. Big deal – my four year old uses the “big” toilet in our apartment just fine.
Using that phrase gives you away as a member of the CEC or 452 administration, who have disrupted a thriving school community for their own personal gain. Shame on you!
I’m not a member of the CEC or ps 452. I am a parent with children already in school who love ‘ve in the current 199 future 452 zone. I am interested because this impacts my neighborhood. I’m sure the phrase you are using as proof against me has tickled into my brain from reading info for and against the move. As you say Scott Parker used this phrase when asking the DOE to move ps 452.
I’m tired of hearing that 452 has to move because the current building wasn’t designed for elementary school students. Yet, Anderson (and I am not advocating to move Anderson) has a K-5 program. The double speak is too much.
My children are at the Manhattan School for Children, a wonderful school of choice in District 3. We are housed in a middle school building and share the space with two middle schools. Yet our school and community is thriving.
I also had the opportunity to send my older child to both PS 452 and Gifted and Talented, and I am so glad I chose MSC, for its model of inclusion, focus on the whole child, and strong academics. My point is that a truly excellent school can rise above any challenges that come with being housed in a middle school space, or almost any space for that matter. MSC is the model of school choice that the CEC and DOE should be trying to replicate, in my personal opinion, instead of focusing so much on moving zone lines from one block to another.
Also, in my opinion the PS 87 parent body really dropped the ball on this. The time to come out in force was last summer and early fall, not two days before the vote. Had all the lower D3 schools come together in September to block the proposal, that might have had some real effect. Instead PS 87 and 9 allowed themselves to believe that they wouldn’t be affected by the re-zone, and thus allowed the CEC to push it through.
Or possibly there are many PS 87 parents, like myself, that were in favor of the rezoning plan and viewed it as the only way to really address the complicated goal of integrating our schools. If you can agree that this was essential, there seemed to be no other option. Personally, I would rather welcome some of the PS 191 families into our school next year, rather than former 452 ones fleeing the attempt at increasing diversity. No one at 87 WANTS classes of 32 children, especially if it causes safety concerns, but that is PS 87’s share of the burden of this change. They strongly advocated for enforcement of the UFT cap, as any and every school should.
Hindsight is always 20/20. And to be fair, it wasn’t until the fourth and last plan concocted by the CEC that PS87 was getting roped in all this mess. But I suspect that even with PS87 and PS9 up in arms since last summer the CEC would’ve still pushed through this self serving excuse of a plan.
I understand 452 parents want to put an end to this debacle, but the fight should carry on. Perhaps the law firm behind the appeal could approach PS87 parents for additional support.
I agree that ps 87 and 9 dropped the ball and should have been out to help oppose rezone on grounds of overcrowding. BUT I also believe that, even if they had come out to oppose, this still would have been passed. These hearings were just a display so the DOE/CEC could rubber stamp their proposal. No one was really being listened to, or will be listened to once the new schools are refigured when this goes through.
These protesters need to give it up already. The re-zoning was a shoddy process that clearly favored specific schools and targeted others. But it passed and now it’s time to move on. Continuing the fight is a waste of time and money. And I say this as a 452 parent, one of the people most affected by all this.
The fact that this was such a biased and sloppy process is the exact reason why parents should NOT give up. Once the DOE and CEC can do this once, they will believe they can do it over and over and over again. Even those who are not directly affected should fight this in order to prevent this process from repeating itself.
Not a 452 Parent – You say “The fact that this was such a biased and sloppy process”
I wonder… what “process” would you have been ok with even if the outcome wasn’t what you wanted?
In other words, how was this process biased and sloppy other than the fact that it was not your personally preferred outcome?
If the DOE had provided data rather than hiding behind FERPA and responded to FOILS… If the DOE had even considered moving Anderson (a highly political move), from what I hear since many of the DOE/CEC & politicians have children in that school, if the CEC hadn’t violated open meeting laws, not putting forth a plan that will cause a previously overcrowded school to become overcrowded once again, increasing diversity at 4-5 schools rather than increasing diversity at 3 and decreasing diversity at 2… Just to name a few. Also, keep in mind, that the fact that I am commenting does NOT mean I am directly affected (I am not).
In a city like NYC, strong-arming parents into zone lines using a broken process only encourages taking advantage of easy movement within the city and will not achieve the stated goals anyway.
NEVER give up, parents! This was a biased, sloppy process. Your elected officials have failed you.
Really, you believe this as a truth, that you elected officials failed you?
I’m a parent of two children who will attend public school in the neighborhood. I don’t think my elected officials failed me. I think my elected officials took a step towards improving conditions for many who live in our neighborhood of modest or lesser means and of equalizing opportunity for all children in the district. Even if you think another approach was better, can you really say that this was a “failure”? And people say this was done too quickly and too sloppily, but this developed over two years including during a failed attempt at re-zoning last year. If we need to address inequality and overcrowding now, why would we expect the public debate to last longer than two years?
Isn’t the ideal of public education equality of opportunity? Why would parents who live in a certain location or attend a certain school or who have a certain background feel more entitled to a public good than anybody else.
I understand parents who are upset that PS452 will move and their children will be bused to a school that’s no longer close to home… I totally get that. But is that really our elected officials “failing” us? Seems like an overreaction.
Don’t we want to teach our children that we should be trying to make the world a better place? If taking a bus for a few years, which may be inconvenient but is by no means the worst thing (and many children who cannot go to neighborhood schools also have to go this), makes us live in a City of more equal opportunity, isn’t that a good thing?
I’ve written this in the past and I’ll say it again — If having to attend a school with children from different economic means is a threat to you… if having to take a school bus is a threat to you… than there are a lot of other towns outside of NYC which may be a better fit for your world-view.
A public education is a public good and the public has an equal right to it. A public good is not entitled to any one person over another, and it certainly isn’t something that a homeowner/landowner has a right to as part of their real-estate.
Looks to me like the district is simply correcting something that has been, for over fifty years, a violation of the notion that all children are entitled to the same quality public education.
Appreciate your comments. Glad to see someone who can see beyond I, me and mine to embrace the effort to enable a more equitable environment.
The doe could have achieved diversity by opening a new school at the vacated 191 building and kept 452 where it is. There would still be three elementary schools at the southern end of d3, and the children at the Amsterdam houses would have had three schools to go to in addition to 452 on 77th st. The third die scenario called for ps 452 at its current location accepting out of zoned children who qualify for free lunch. This is a better plan for d3 since there would be an additional school. I don’t understand why 452 has to move instead of opening a new school at the vacated 191.
James – are you personally impacted by the rezone?
Anon — Yes my child’s elementary school was rezoned as part of this process, so we will not be able to attend the school closest to our home and the one we planned when we moved into the neighborhood.
That being said, your trying to qualify my response based on how it impacts me personally misses my point. It’s not about me. It’s not about you. It’s about having a more equal and fair City.
Sorry to wax philosophical – we need to be able to look past our elected leaders being simply there to benefit us personally. Government does not exist merely to do our bidding. Government exists to look after the whole. Helping to equalize our school system improves the whole and thus improves the City for all of us.
AMEN!
Your privileged kids have to mix with average, every day New Yorkers now… the horror of it all.
That’s not even close to the concerns of most parents. In particular, the point in case with PS87 is overcrowding and the dangers that come with it.
Zulu – I can understand the concern that 87 will become overcrowded based on the new zoning lines… but do the enraged parents really know that will happen certainly?
My block has dozens of families with pre-school aged children who were previously zoned for 87. After the re-zoning, we are no longer zoned for 87.
So isn’t it at least possible that the DOE took a look at the new re-zoning lines and came to the conclusion that 87 will not become overcrowded?
Plus — The reality is that people move around, especially in this town. No matter the outcome of the debate at this point, won’t DOE need to revisit anyway in a few years? For example, several big buildings are opening on the West Side which will feed into 191, which is in a new building for a new lease on life… 452 is a good school already that will now be available to children in the 60s.
Isn’t it at least possible that things will change in a way that we don’t expect?
The parents upset about PS87 are acting as if they know with certainty what the future holds, and I would argue that’s simply not the case.
Time will tell for certain, but for PS87 there has been a precedent of overcrowding in that not too distant past.
Of course I can’t tell what the future holds but I also don’t need to have clairvoyant abilities to safely deduce that by removing PS452 from across the street there will be an additional number of families that will seek PS87 admission for the next school year. That’s just simple logical reasoning.
I understand and support the initiative to desegregate PS191 but in the case of PS87, the CEC and the DOT could be placing children and staff at risk.
Perhaps you can answer these questions. When was the last time the DOT performed a Building Egress Analysis? The current building was built in the mid 50s, since then a number of revisions had been made to the NYC Building Code. Is the building still compliant? Has the additional student count been considered in the case of an emergency evacuation? I for one have very little faith the DOT considered any of these potential issues. Are you confident they did their due diligence?
Someone will always be sour whatever the resolution. One solution that should have been implemented years ago, is that you lose your spot at a school when you move. Way too many people move to the PS 87 and PS 199 catchments temporarily when it comes to applying for school, and once their kids are in those schools they move somewhere else. The current policy is just way too easy to take advantage of. And the honest residents pay for it.
“Someone will always be sour whatever the resolution.”
This is a sad statement in itself. Don’t we teach our children that they shouldn’t get upset when they don’t get their way?
Just because the outcome of this process may inconvenience some doesn’t mean it wasn’t the right thing to do.
A lot of these elementary schools probably have the age old saying displayed somewhere: “What is popular is not always right. What is right is not always popular.”
Seems like parents should be spending more time learning the lessons of their children’s books these days.
In this particular case the outcome was for a good cause (increased integration — although the DOE has stated that wasn’t their main goal). BUT what if this was the same process under CEC and DOE elected officials under, say Trump, would you still so staunchly support the process. This is why we have checks and balances. Checks and balances need to be maintained, even when the outcome seems to be of a worthy cause. When average citizens (especially middle income citizens) are allowed to be pawns in a bureaucratic game, we are no longer living in a democracy.
The rules about being allowed to stay in a school until the terminating grade even if you move out of zone exist to protect kids with unstable home lives. If they are shuttling between a grandparent or a foster home or a shelter the system tries to give them stability by keeping their school and their classmates. In a city where 2 of every 3 students is poor enough to get free lunch this is much more important than overcrowding of a few UMC schools.
Well put – I am very frustrated by the families taking advantage of loopholes, but as you noted, the rule has a greater purpose that needs to be considered.
That being said, I know a number of families who use fake addresses to establish residencies, whether it is a grandparent’s pied a terre or a short term rental that they never move into. Ideally, on the first day of school, someone should check to see if kids really live where they say they do, particularly kindergarteners who are establishing residency for the next six years – if a family of four claims to be in a small studio with one bed, they should be called out on it. That being said, as aggravating as this is, I don’t know if having DOE officials running around to knock on doors is the best use of its extremely limited resources. These families just have to live with the fact that they are abusing the rules and encouraging their young children to lie.
Hopefully one day that will close down the loophole that allows wealthy parents to buy or rent their way into their preferred school zone. This loophole is constantly exploited by the wealthy and privileged. (I’m not criticizing anyone who posted in this thread, I’m just being a bit provocative intentionally.)
Someone who lives long term in the zone has no more right to the schools than someone who only lives there temporarily. There simply are no private rights to school zones, full stop, end of statement. Only the public good should determine allocation of publicly-funded educational opportunity, despite our legacy school zoning system that gives off a different impression.
So create an exemption/carve-out for these situations. These situations are probably an exception rather than what more often occurs as Anon3 is alluding to. If the DOE were to look into parents “gaming” the zone lines, it would likely help alleviate overcrowding in the more popular schools.
Absolutely! I raised this to a CEC member. And his feedback was just that do we have evidence of it?? Well, why don’t the CEC demand DOE demand it.
Frankly, if this was the suburbs, if you move, then you move schools. But because it’s the city, it’s easier to get to and goes undetected.
Verify and validate!
Cute picture of the baby looking at the camera while everyone else is focused on the meeting.
You know the UWS doesn’t end at 96 street.
More students at PS75, 145, 163 and 165 will be effected than those down in 84 and 191.
I wish these articles would stop lumping all District 3 parents into the “disgruntled” category. As a D3 parent with a child in one of the impacted schools (and another on the way), I fully support this move and recognize that it’s a needed step in the integration of our HIGHLY segregated schools. I’ve attended several of the hearings and I have to say, I’m embarrassed to be mistakenly aligned to some of the parents opposed to the changes. Some of the arguments I’ve heard boarder on white supremacist speech. Coded language that hides the true fears parents have of integration. There is so much racial and socioeconomic privilege at play here and it’s rather disgusting. There is rampant limousine liberalism and NIMBY. The UWS should lose it’s reputation for being a bastion of progressive beliefs and values.
D3 Parent – Amen about NIMBYism.
I doubt folks enraged by this move look at themselves in the mirror and think they are “white supremacists.”
But fact is that the level of anger here couldn’t be so high if there wasn’t some perceived threat. Those parents so upset about this re-zone ought to do some self-examination on why they feel so threatened.
¨White Supremists¨?
Another take on integration: “while district school systems often seek to achieve integration by forcing families to send their children to less preferred schools, charter schools do so by offering parents additional choices.”
https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/charting-integration-charter-schools-article-1.2901046
You can clearly see the difference between comments from those who understand the facts and those who simple make generalizations not based on facts. The reality is, the CEC could have integrated 4 schools w plan C, and not upended PS452 families again (if you have been paying attention, you know what I refer to). The attorney spells out quite well why this vote should be challenged and all public school parents should pay attention – if the DOE and CECs are allowed to make important decisions based on inaccurate data, flawed assumptions, personal opinion and back dealing then parents are allowing themselves to be a pawn in someone else’s chess game.
Cass — So since the CEC didn’t choose Plan C — which you apparently thought was best — and chose a different plan — all of a sudden anybody who supports the move isn’t basing this on facts? That could be insulting to those of us who did our homework and went to meetings and have followed this debate and are in favor of the rezone.
Frankly, even if one doesn’t feel like this was the best of all available options, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it still wasn’t appropriate to approve the plan. The well-known expression “perfect is the enemy of the good” comes to mind.
Well said, James
Don’t mean to cause trouble, but no one has explained how moving Anderson would weaken the worthy goal of integration. Thanks.
Lois,
I don’t know that moving Anderson would weaken integration — that would depend on where you move it — but how would it help? The integration piece of this plan relies on splitting the Amsterdam Houses into 3 zones. Some at the new PS 191 on WEA, some at PS 452 in the existing 191 building, and some into PS 199 on W70th St. To split into 3 zones they need 3 elementary schools at the lower end of the district. I suppose they could have also opted to leave PS 452 where it is and open a brand new school in the PS 191 building and achieved this but there are not currently enough elementary school aged kids in the lower part of the district to support that capacity.
“I suppose they could have also opted to leave PS 452 where it is and open a brand new school in the PS 191 building and achieved this but there are not currently enough elementary school aged kids in the lower part of the district to support that capacity.”
I am not sure why nobody has picked up on this. The fact that there are not enough elementary school kids to support that capacity demonstrates how this plan is not viable. Moving 452 is a temporary fix in terms of number of children. The current class comes from a different section of district 3 that will now be zoned to PS 87 and ps 199. So once the current classes graduate, there will once again be too few children to fill the school… Really, moving Anderson is the only logical option (other than Charter) because once the current 452 classes are out, the new 452 will be under capacity while ps 87 will be overflowing and have class sizes (32!) that are too large for children to learn.
Thank you. But the elementary schools in the mid-to-upper 70s sound filled to capacity. Is it not possible for some of the Amsterdam Houses children to still be zoned to 452 if it remains in place, given the room moving Anderson would free up? The consensus has been that traveling that distance is no big deal.
PS 452 at the W77th St location is not filled to capacity. They currently have 3 K sections with a total of 66 kids, and 2 sections per grade 1-5 with between 43 and 55 kids. Under union rules the upper grades could hold 32 kids per class. I think that school was slated to have 3 classes per grade, that never happened.
I think most people do realize moving a school .9 miles is a big impact for families. The difference in sending the 452 kids to 61st St vs sending the existing 191 families to W 77th St is that in the case of moving 452 this commute would be “temporary”. It would be for all the remaining elementary school years for kids now in 452 but no new children would have this commute. If we talk about sending families from Amsterdam Houses up to W 77th St that is a more “permanent” solution in that we’d be expecting incoming kindergarteners each year to be given this long commute for the entirety of their elementary school years.
People are worried about potential overcrowding at PS 87 due to the new zones. I don’t know how valid this concern is. If the DOE thought it was a problem they would have put an elementary school in the 452 space rather than move a middle school into that floor.
When Success Academy was petitioning to move into the Brandeis building on West 84th (~2010), there was almost unanimous opposition against it by parents and even parent-led education committees reporting to the DOE.
Success won out.
Eva, I know you are listening … the families affected by this re-zoning want Lincoln Square Success Academy!
and where would this Lincoln Square Success Academy be located?
Let me guess, the old 191 building where PS 452 is moving since there will be empty space….
Could someone please clarify the acceptance priority for 199 now. I know it is first In zone siblings. Is it then siblings that were in the zone for 199 but no longer in the zone due to the rezoning OR is it IN zone children entering kindergarten? Also, how many kindergarten classes will there be for the 2017-18 year at 199? Is the number the same or being reduced? Thank you.
Inzone siblings and previously inzone siblings gave the same priority.
What a bunch of bull doo doo.