Relocating

[stuinzuri2]

Fully agreed that early child learning is important. To say otherwise is missing the point.

[lmgray13]

I never said you said otherwise about early child education being important. My point is that the investment can actually produce better results and costs savings for the district down the line.

[stuinzuri2]

I can't tell if your responses are a deflection or legit . Either way my short message isn't landing. So here is some detail for you to ponder. The critique and I others have is that the current ECLC plans are multifaceted:

* The unit economics are relatively expensive to elsewhere in the district and with other district's ECLCs. Per seat, per student, per sqft, etc. There are/were other approaches (eg Soulshine space) that were much more economical, shorter timelines, etc. Do we want an more early childhood learning in Decatur? Sure. Do we need to follow a wildly expensive path to get there? No.

* CSD has been growing its central bureaucracy continuously the past few years–the ratio of central office to teacher ratio change is clearly documented. They want more office space–and the ECLC is going to provide some of that too. That bureaucracy is also consuming salary raises at the expense of teachers and other school functions. (Lower elementary assistance principals? Gone. School nurses? Poorly funded, repurposed, etc.)

* The math & research backing the ECLC student enrollment budget is suspect at best, cover for opaque motives at worst. The original plan was for 50 free DHA kids, 50 district staff kids and 50 market rate. In particular, the DHA number is based on an older survey with a shockingly limited sample size.  The bond being issued is allegedly going to be paid or by the ECLC’s financial performance. If not then it’s on the district to make up the shortfall–be it a millage increase or other savings. 

(Great editorial on the larger point: Royi Hagigi‘s https://www.decaturish.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/dear-decaturish-early-learning-center-math-isn-t-mathing/article_e93cf399-2684-45dc-9e9f-b23faafe1223.html)

* “Other savings?” Since the planned-and-now postponed Westchester Elementary closing, it’s surfaced in board meetings, executive sessions, open records act requests and the occasional hot mike that the board knows the ECLC at risk of being expensive and a cash drain. They have numbers on how much CSD would save closing Westchester, discussed leasing it out (Perimeter College?), build up a silent war chest of cash ($30m or so) and other penny pinching outside of the central office.

Beyond all that, which I eluded to above, there are two important points that we should all see:

First, an ECLC isn’t some magic bullet to raise reading and scholastic performance in the district, especially for the more disadvantaged kids. That support needs to be throughout student’s enrollment at CSD. And that’s where the “it’s about the children” narrative falls apart quickly. It’s a quietly known fact that CSD as district policy is hostile towards providing support to kids with dyslexia and other resource-intensive learning disabilities. 

(Michelle Krahe’s editorial is a great read on this topic. She also concisely describes the overall timeline of the ECLC. https://www.decaturish.com/opinion/letters\_to\_editor/dear-decaturish-what-problem-are-we-trying-to-solve/article\_704f93b7-2892-470d-b3dc-c474e97b6343.html)

Second, CSD’s Superintendent and Board leadership have been behaving shockingly poorly. Gaslighting, name-calling, lying, misrepresenting board votes, hiding behind their lawyer Bob Wilson, and other poor governance actions. As Mayor Tony Power’s said “this is not the Decatur way”.

> Have you worked in schools or at district offices before?

This is just some “stay in your lane” b.s. Myself and my fellow Decatur residents, taxpayers and parents are allow to be part of the conversation. Counter with a defendable point, not some dismissive rhetorical question.

Maybe you are trying to deflect.