As the Portland Director of Stand for Children, I want to briefly chime and set the record straight: Stand did not and does not plan to take a position on school closures. We have worked extremely hard to lobby the district to include the academic priority zones as part of the initial HS Redesign plan, and we have turned out a number of testifiers to speak in support of this aspect of the overall redesign.
To clear up question at hand: Stand has teams all over the city (though we certainly need to reach more communities and talk to even more people, so please consider emailing me and we can set up a time to talk about your concerns in your community in Portland). In any case, the Lincoln parents who testified at the board meeting are also Stand leaders, but their position represented their specific team, not Stand as a whole. We have other leaders and teams who think quite the opposite, and they’ve made themselves heard at board meetings as well.
Thanks for your time.

Tyler Whitmire
twhitmire@stand.org

Zeke Smith once angrily suggested I was not the only person who cared about poor kids in the district. While this is true I am sure, it is hard to argue that ALL kids are treated equitably within the district at the present time. And much of the difference is based on their economic situation. And it is also not hard to argue that the district sees people who really want justice within the system as the enemy, unwilling to allow them into the process in a meaningful way. Just the way it is.

I think it’s important to note that while PSF allows wealthier schools to stabilize curriculum and PSF offers grants using 1/3 of donated funds (after first $10,000) to all Portland Public Schools, 2009-2010 was the first year PSF allowed grant money to be used for FTE. The only schools ineligible for school-based grants are those schools that will not disclosure PTA funds (see http://www.thinkschools.org/grant-programs/school-based/ “2010-2011 PPS School-based Grants: Formula” and “2010-2011 PPS School-based Grants: Rankings”).

While many schools are able to reliably raise enough funds to support music, art, PE, etc. year after year, other schools may apply for a school-based grant that can now be used for FTE for one year. For 2010-2011, of the 57 schools eligible for school-based grants, only 23 will receive one. The majority of those grants are for $20,000, which will buy less than 1/2 an FTE position. And I’m not sure with the new formula if this is still correct, but in years past, schools receiving grants one year would not receive them the next.

I’m not advocating for eliminating PSF or for individual schools to fundraise. Both are a reality of the current public education climate. I also don’t think Lincoln or Wilson cluster parents need worry that they will be forced to jump onto the private school bandwagon. The PPS board has made it very clear keeping middle/upper class families is a high priority.

Continuing to move toward offering equitable education throughout the district, whether a student’s parents/guardians are able to pay a premium or not, is important also.

You seem oblivious to the inequity of program offerings created by the system you defend. Yes, 1/3 goes into a pot, but that has to be spread out among ALL the poor schools in the district, which are the MAJORITY. In the meantime, Lincoln/Wilson schools get to keep the other 2/3, which means you still have double of what you gave to be spread out among everyone else. By the time other individual schools get a piece, it isn’t enough to pay for even a half-time teacher. The “grants” that the Foundation awards are only a few hundred or a few thousand at a time; enough to buy some books or supplies, or pay for some after-school activities or teacher training, but far short of what is needed to fund things like music, art, library, PE, foreign language–what you folks take for granted that are now luxuries here on the east side.

However, you appear to really resent the Lincoln/Wilson cluster successes, including the fact that some parents have the financial ability to make donations to their schools’ foundations; for reasons discussed below, this is puzzling.

I note that under PPS foundation rules, 33% of each school foundation donations in excess of $10,000 annually are set aside for the benefit of less financially well-off schools. For example, per the foundation website (http://www.thinkschools.org/about-us/thanks-donors/donor-list/), more than $100,000 was set aside for other Portland schools from amounts raised by the Lincoln High School Foundation in 08/09 (a terrible year, financially). When you add in the Wilson, Ainsworth, Bridlemile and East/West Sylvan Foundation amounts, this is a great deal of money being raised annually by parents in the Lincoln/Wilson cluster that is directly benefitting students in other areas such as Marshall, etc.

Accordingly, I just don’t understand the vitriol over this. You and others here say you’d like to see Lincoln closed. As evidenced by the amount of money raised by their foundation, many of the parents in the Lincoln basin have the resources to send their kids to private high schools, but choose not to. In all likelihood, closure of and/or degradation of Lincoln will mean many/most of those Lincoln students eventually will either move to other districts (e.g., Lake Oswego or Riverdale) or shift to private schools. If that happens, the amounts that would otherwise be sent to the PPS foundation (for use by other schools) will disappear.

When you criticize Lincoln/Wilson parents for expressing concern about those schools as a call to raise additional foundation money, etc., I have to wonder whether you would actually prefer that those parents shift their kids (and their money) to other non PPS schools, or to continue to support Lincoln and generously give to the Lincoln foundation (of which 1/3 of amounts raised are shared with other schools).