This is the blog section of the PURE Reform website. Please leave your thoughts and comments here.
PURE Reform has created this blog as a forum for parents, teachers and community members to share information and voice concerns regrading the reform process in the Pittsburgh Public Schools. Although we would like to foster constructive dialogue, PURE Reform does not edit content. The views expressed by bloggers in this forum are not necessarily views held by PURE Reform.
To comment on an existing topic, go to the line at the bottom of the post for that topic that begins "Posted by..." That line will list "1 comment," "2 comments," etc. Click on "comments," then leave your comment in the box provided. To post as Anonymous, no registration is required, OR you can choose an identity.
To suggest a new topic, go to this month's post labeled "Start a New Post" and add your comment (as described above) about the new suggested topic. PURE Reform will use these comments to start new posts.
This is bizarre. A panel composed mostly of developers makes a recommendation and the other bidders act like it's game over.
First, the board is supposed to be considering whether to even sell the building at all (and waiting for a revised estimate to renovate). The board should be seriously deliberating the merits of selling Schenley rather than Peabody or the Board of Education building.
Second, this is a decision to be made by the school board- not a sales agent panel. And since this is after all a school district, recommendations from educators should be important in board deliberations.
I find this development odd as well. In January the Board voted to get an up to date estimate on renovation of Schenley. They seemed to finally be moving to take some action on the abundant criticism from parents, community, the auditor general and urging of City Controller Michael Lamb. But now it seems that they are just pushing forward with the sale regardless. 4th River Development, the group involved in the proposal, was hired to market Schenley in June 2012. So that process was already in play but now the recommended group, PMC / Schenley HSB is set to present their plans for Schenley to the Board on Feb. 18, there will be a board meeting for community comment on Feb. 25 and the Board will vote on Feb 27. Where does the review of renovation costs come into this. The vote for that review should obviously dictate that this whole process be put on hold until it has happened. Has that process even started? Aside from the appearance of circumventing that review it rubbed me the wrong way that a proposal for luxury apartments came out on top of an evaluation that included “commitment to the community” as a selection criteria. PMC was said to be the highest ranking but scores won’t be released. Why? Can we have some transparency please? So many groups of stakeholders have made it abundantly clear that they are very displeased with the handling of everything that has happened with Schenley from the parents and students who fought like crazy to keep it open up to today with the petition and city officials weighing in. The Board has a responsibility to these people and groups and yet they still seem to be brushing that accountability aside. How can a vote for selling the school happen before the review of renovation costs?
Sad to say that the review of reno costs may be just a going through the motions action. As things are it will be difficult to approve any improvement and re-opening.
The whole thing is like a horrible nightmare. Well we all better wake up. How often does a school or program come along in PPS that inspires this kind of love and enthusiasm? Maybe PPS has something to teach Broad, rather than the other way around. If you have a good thing, rather than destroying it for its shortcomings you need to build on the strengths to fix the shortcomings. Here it with a few more resources and organization it would have been easy to take the enormous enthusiasm and parent/community/alum support to bring along those who lagged behind. Let's not lose this opportunity. Hands off Schenley!
" Anonymous said... Hands off Pittsburgh Public Schools!
At the rate we are losing students, teachers, schools and community commitment there will soon be little left of our once proud school district!
February 9, 2013 at 6:05 PM"
Game, set, match. The failure of public schools is the GOAL. This is all a part of GW Bush and NCLB. Education is HUGE money and the "Job Creators" cannot fathom or stand not to profit it from it.
Do a little bit of research a nd you will wake up to what is really going on.
I am no fan of GW Bush. In fact, I think he should have been impeached. But that's another story.
But why focus all the blame on Bush? The Democrats controlled both houses of Congress during Obama's first two years in office. Yet still we have NCLB merrily rolling along.
Well, 1:20, let's just say that 6:05 has done as much, if not more research, than just about anyone. The difference is that 6:05 has not given up one doing whatever can be done to turn the tide, as well as trying (however ineffectively) to "wake up" others to joining the effort. Placing blame on Bush, NCLB, or anyone, is just shifting the responsibility somewhere, anywhere else. We are here, now, in Pittsburgh complaining endlessly but in the final analysis just letting it happen with our youth's futures at risk. Why?
8 comments:
This is bizarre. A panel composed mostly of developers makes a recommendation and the other bidders act like it's game over.
First, the board is supposed to be considering whether to even sell the building at all (and waiting for a revised estimate to renovate). The board should be seriously deliberating the merits of selling Schenley rather than Peabody or the Board of Education building.
Second, this is a decision to be made by the school board- not a sales agent panel. And since this is after all a school district, recommendations from educators should be important in board deliberations.
I find this development odd as well. In January the Board voted to get an up to date estimate on renovation of Schenley. They seemed to finally be moving to take some action on the abundant criticism from parents, community, the auditor general and urging of City Controller Michael Lamb. But now it seems that they are just pushing forward with the sale regardless.
4th River Development, the group involved in the proposal, was hired to market Schenley in June 2012. So that process was already in play but now the recommended group, PMC / Schenley HSB is set to present their plans for Schenley to the Board on Feb. 18, there will be a board meeting for community comment on Feb. 25 and the Board will vote on Feb 27.
Where does the review of renovation costs come into this. The vote for that review should obviously dictate that this whole process be put on hold until it has happened. Has that process even started?
Aside from the appearance of circumventing that review it rubbed me the wrong way that a proposal for luxury apartments came out on top of an evaluation that included “commitment to the community” as a selection criteria. PMC was said to be the highest ranking but scores won’t be released. Why? Can we have some transparency please?
So many groups of stakeholders have made it abundantly clear that they are very displeased with the handling of everything that has happened with Schenley from the parents and students who fought like crazy to keep it open up to today with the petition and city officials weighing in. The Board has a responsibility to these people and groups and yet they still seem to be brushing that accountability aside. How can a vote for selling the school happen before the review of renovation costs?
Sad to say that the review of reno costs may be just a going through the motions action. As things are it will be difficult to approve any improvement and re-opening.
The whole thing is like a horrible nightmare. Well we all better wake up. How often does a school or program come along in PPS that inspires this kind of love and enthusiasm? Maybe PPS has something to teach Broad, rather than the other way around. If you have a good thing, rather than destroying it for its shortcomings you need to build on the strengths to fix the shortcomings. Here it with a few more resources and organization it would have been easy to take the enormous enthusiasm and parent/community/alum support to bring along those who lagged behind. Let's not lose this opportunity. Hands off Schenley!
Hands off Pittsburgh Public Schools!
At the rate we are losing students, teachers, schools and community commitment there will soon be little left of our once proud school district!
" Anonymous said...
Hands off Pittsburgh Public Schools!
At the rate we are losing students, teachers, schools and community commitment there will soon be little left of our once proud school district!
February 9, 2013 at 6:05 PM"
Game, set, match. The failure of public schools is the GOAL. This is all a part of GW Bush and NCLB. Education is HUGE money and the "Job Creators" cannot fathom or stand not to profit it from it.
Do a little bit of research a nd you will wake up to what is really going on.
"This is all a part of GW Bush and NCLB."
I am no fan of GW Bush. In fact, I think he should have been impeached. But that's another story.
But why focus all the blame on Bush? The Democrats controlled both houses of Congress during Obama's first two years in office. Yet still we have NCLB merrily rolling along.
Well, 1:20, let's just say that 6:05 has done as much, if not more research, than just about anyone. The difference is that 6:05 has not given up one doing whatever can be done to turn the tide, as well as trying (however ineffectively) to "wake up" others to joining the effort. Placing blame on Bush, NCLB, or anyone, is just shifting the responsibility somewhere, anywhere else. We are here, now, in Pittsburgh complaining endlessly but in the final analysis just letting it happen with our youth's futures at risk. Why?
Post a Comment