Hide Notes 

Slide 1: Schools hat schools are a vital part of a community’s health is no secret. And REALTORS® are well aware of the importance of school quality (or reputation of quality) to many home buyers and to property values. But achieving quality public schools—and paying for them—is no easy matter. The national debate about improving school quality has become stronger—and louder—in recent years, as competing philosophies of education battle it out in the political realm. The fiscal bite of providing good schools is forcing many states and localities to investigate new approaches to taxation, as growing areas have trouble keeping up with increasing school enrollments, and older communities declining in population find it difficult to maintain old buildings and compete with newer suburban school systems. Last year, the National Association of REALTORS® State and Local Issues Committee established a Public Education Working Group to study issues and trends in public education and to identify different approaches being used to provide better education. In addition to developing NAR policy on public education (an ongoing process), one goal of the working group is to encourage and enable REALTORS® and REALTOR® associations to get more involved in public education and be a supportive partner to schools. With that goal in mind, this special issue of On Common Ground discusses current trends in public education, with a particular focus on REALTOR® involvement in assisting schools in their communities. Schools also are an important part of the Smart Growth puzzle, as schools not only respond to growth but can encourage or steer growth. School location can greatly affect development and trans- smartGrowth & T portation patterns, and the effect of school size on the educational and social development of students is the focus of current research. These considerations are bringing about a reevaluation of the late-20th century trend toward larger schools on larger sites farther from the hearts of communities. These and many other current issues related to schools are discussed in this issue of our magazine. Special thanks to NAR’s Public Education Working Group and its chair Phil McGinnis for their guidance on this special issue of On Common Ground. 2 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 2: For more information on NAR and Smart Growth, go to www.realtor.org/smartgrowth. On Common Ground is published twice a year by the Government Affairs office of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (NAR), and is distributed free of charge. The publication presents a wide range of views on Smart Growth issues, with the goal of encouraging a dialogue among REALTORS®, elected officials and other interested citizens. The opinions expressed in On Common Ground are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or policy of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, its members or affiliate organizations. Editor Joseph R. Molinaro Manager, Smart Growth Programs NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® 500 New Jersey Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001 Special Issue Co-Editor Bob McNamara Smart Growth Policy Representative NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® 500 New Jersey Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001 Distribution: For more copies of this issue or to be placed on our mailing list for future issues of On Common Ground, please contact: Ted Wright, NAR Government Affairs, at (202) 383-1206 or twright@realtors.org. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 3
Slide 3: 16 6 Sprawl Schools and Small Schools Community School 34 High Performance Schools 28 Charter Schools 4 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 4: On Common Ground winter 2005 6 Of Sprawl Schools and Small Schools A convergence of movements offers hope that Johnny can once again walk to a great neighborhood school. by David Goldberg 12 Reading, Writing and Real Estate REALTORS® work to improve public schools. by Carol Everett 16 The ABCs of Smart Growth Spell Out the Community School Vision Community school advocates and leaders of the Smart Growth movement use the same principles and partnerships to promote better schools for our children. by John Van Gieson 22 Smart Partnerships Construct Smart Schools Many public-private partnerships, using Smart Growth fundamentals, are being formed to help ensure that school districts keep pace with population increases, development and parental demands. by Brad Broberg Downtown Schools 34 52 28 Charter Schools—Are They Reinvigorating Public Education? Parents, neighborhoods and new developments are gaining choices when it comes to educational opportunities for their children. by Jason Miller High Performance Schools Green/sustainable school buildings create healthier students, happier parents and more attractive Smart Growth neighborhoods. by Heidi Johnson-Wright 40 Choosing Sides: The School Choice Debate I. A Matter of Choice by Jeanne Allen, President of The Center for Education Reform II. Vouchers Not the Answer by Michael Pons, Policy Analyst for the National Education Association 46 40 Live Where You Teach Cities and school districts are working together to build affordable housing for teachers. by Christine Jordan Sexton 52 Choosing Sides 58 Downtown Schools The New Urban Frontier by Martin Zimmerman Smart Growth in the States Cover photo by Jack Weinberg, courtesy of The Department of Energy and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 5
Slide 5: of sprawl A convergence of movements offers hope that Johnny can once again walk to a great neighborhood school. Photos contributed by Kevin Shaver of BBT Architects, Inc and the Ensworth Elementary School. 6 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 6: schools & small schools by David Goldberg s students at Fairfield Senior High School in suburban Cincinnati headed back to school this year, they got a message from the local police: Don’t even think about walking. Law officers were moved to issue the warning after the local school district decided to eliminate bus service for high school kids in response to a budget crisis. It turns out that because the school, built in 1997, is set among busy, multi-lane roads with no sidewalks, even students who live within a mile of the school had been taking the bus, if they didn’t go by car. Police were terrified at the prospect of kids trying to navigate that hostile environment without automotive armament. Much as it pained him, Fairfield Mayor Erick A Cook, himself a principal of an elementary school in another district, echoed the plea. “The bottom line is, the school system, developers and the city failed the kids by neglecting to put in sidewalks,” Cook said. But the larger problem, Cook went on to acknowledge, was the selection of the site in the first place. In the hunt for a spot large enough for the modern high school, with its outsized parking and sprawling, single-story building, officials felt forced to look to the developing fringe of town. Because most kids would have to arrive by car, they opted for highway access. And rather than build the sidewalks that were left out when the area developed, they chose to bus students who lived nearby. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 7
Slide 7: But Cook noted that Fairfield is hardly alone in this situation. In fact, his own school, South Lebanon elementary in South Lebanon, Ohio followed a similar pattern, having moved a few years ago from a historic, centrally located building to a new site accessible only by car or bus. It’s a trend he laments. “As the people began to move outward, you moved away from the ability to create neighborhood schools.” Again, though, Ohio has plenty of company—about 49 other states, in fact. In suburban DeKalb County, Georgia, 57 percent of school principals rate the area around their schools moderately to extremely dangerous for kids on foot or bicycle, according to a survey by the county health department. Neighboring Gwinnett County actually has sited schools on highways in commercial and light industrial zones in order to fetch a higher resale price should the school fall into disuse. Indeed, the phenomenon of building spreadout schools in unwalkable environments is so common it now has a name: “school sprawl”. A raft of statistics illustrates the consequences of the trend. As recently as 1969 roughly half of all students walked or biked to school. In 2001 the number was closer to one in 10. A study in South Carolina discovered that children are four times as likely to walk to schools built before 1983 than to those built after that year. The report attributed the change largely to the increasingly remote and pedestrian-hostile settings of newer schools. Of course, kids generally are less active today, and that’s one reason the rates of obesity and physical inactivity among kids have risen so that 30 percent of our kids are overweight or obese and a third of middle and high schoolers are sedentary. At the same time, the rise in rush-hour traffic associated with school trips has been identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a key contributor to air quality problems in a number of cities. In addition to the effects on traffic and kids’ health, critics of school sprawl note other issues, as well. Large, new schools built in a previously undeveloped area often act as a magnet for new residential development, drawing people and resources away from existing schools and neighborhoods, and large, drive-to schools fail to serve as a neighborhood resource and focal point. Because school districts and local governments do their planning in isolation from one another, the new growth often takes local officials by surprise, causing them to scramble to build the roads, water mains, sewer lines and other services to support it. This uncoordinated planning is one reason many suburban schools open with classroom trailers parked outside, the critics say. Meanwhile, there is mounting evidence that the impersonal environment of the mega-school inhibits the basic function of the school; that is, giving kids the best education possible. This realization has given rise to a growing movement for small schools, a cause gaining an increasingly high profile with the involvement of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and many others. This movement is finding com- 8 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 8: Large, new schools built in a previously undeveloped area often act as a magnet for new residential development, drawing people and resources away from existing schools and neighborhoods. mon cause with the movement for Smart Growth, a term used to refer to better planning that values improving the places we’ve built before sprawling willy-nilly into new territory. Together they’re working to change the rules and habits that contribute to school sprawl. Why Big Schools? The case for larger schools has been that they can offer a more comprehensive curriculum, and that the upper grades can have access to a wider range of activities, from chess club to Japanese club, for which there would be too few students in a smaller setting. This often had the ring of an attempt to make a virtue of necessity, as state and local school officials pushed for the economies of scale from greater concentrations of students, services and facilities. Perhaps the most influential advocate for “sprawl schools” was the Council of Educational Facility Planners (CEFPI), an Arizona-based professional association that issues guidance on school construction. According to standards that were in place from the 1970s until very recently, an elementary school of 500 students requires 15 acres, and a high school of 2,000 would need at least 50 acres. By contrast, older neighborhood schools occupy two to eight acres. Those existing schools themselves were disadvantaged by the socalled two-thirds rule used by CEFPI and others: If the cost to rehab a school exceeds 60 percent of cost of replacement, build a new school. Building anew at the “proper” size means either razing nearby buildings—which is prohibitively expensive—or moving the school out of the neighborhood. According to a South Carolina study, school site size has increased in every decade since 1950, and schools built in the last 20 years are 41 percent larger than those built previously. “The problem has been that, in order to meet those standards, given the cost and availability of land, school officials feel the need to abandon neighborhood sites and build in the middle of nowhere,” said Constance Beaumont, author of “Why Johnny Can’t Walk to School,” a report by the National Trust for Historic Preservation that was among the first to address the issue of school sprawl. There are signs that the tide is beginning to turn in some states, Beaumont noted. Maryland now prioritizes rehab and construction in urbanized areas, rather than building schools in greenfields. In the last few years, 80 percent of construction money went to reconstruction and rehab, versus 25 percent in the mid-1990s. In California, a program called Safe Routes to School earmarks one-third of federal road-safety money for improvements around schools, creating safe crossings, adding sidewalks and bikeways, etc. The program has been so popular that a version of it has been included in proposed federal legislation. Others are taking a closer look at the trade-offs involved. In Oregon a study in the Bend-La Pine WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 9
Slide 9: district found that, compared to sites on the metro fringe, “sites in higher density neighborhoods decreased total transportation costs by 32 percent annually and lowered site development costs by 14 percent.” As a result, this fall the district opened Ensworth Elementary School, a compact, two-story prototype neighborhood school designed and located so that all of its 300 students can walk or bike. And nearly all do, said Beaumont, who now works for Oregon’s transportation and growth management program. Perhaps most significantly, CEFPI itself recently unveiled “Creating Connections,” a re-examination of its siting guidelines that puts an emphasis on viewing schools in the larger community context. (Find it on the web at http://www.cefpi.org:80/creatingconnections/index.html.) Small Schools The return of the neighborhood school is getting a large boost from a growing body of research demonstrating the benefits of smaller school environments. The research has been motivated at one end by the concerns of rural communities that are seeing their local schools closed in a wave of consolidation, and at the other by advocates for smaller, more manageable schools in low-income, urban areas. So what have they found? Smaller schools have lower drop-out rates and higher average scores on standardized tests. Children in high-poverty schools see an even more pronounced improvement. While it’s true that larger schools generally do show a small savings on spending per student, when that figure is computed for students who actually graduate, the pergraduate cost per student actually is slightly lower. Larger schools can have more extracurricular offerings, but participation in after-school activities declines as schools get larger. A U.S. Department of Education report found that schools with over 1,000 students have much higher rates of crime and vandalism than schools with 300 or fewer students. And teacher satisfaction is higher in smaller schools, according to a Chicago study. (You can find links to much of the research online at http://www.smallschoolsworkshop.org/info3.html#8.) There is mounting evidence that the impersonal environment of the mega-school inhibits the basic function of the school. Convinced by the research, several philanthropies are supporting the small-schools movement. Since 1994, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has committed more than $1 billion to improving public schools, primarily through creating small high schools. Gates advocates high schools of 400 students or fewer, arguing that they can “provide a personalized learning environment where every student has an adult advocate. Students in small schools feel less alienated and tend to be more actively engaged in school activities.” Despite the growing appreciation for small schools, a number of daunting challenges remain. School funding is among the largest. Many administrators remain convinced that a smaller number of campuses reduces administrative and other costs. 10 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 10: The notion that big and (typically) new is better than small and (frequently) old is ingrained and difficult to reverse. One of the thorniest issues, though, may be the implications for student-body diversity when schools draw from smaller geographic areas. “There is a bit of a conflict between small schools and integration,” acknowledges Jonathan Weiss, a former Clinton Administration official and author of “Public Schools and Economic Development: What the Research Shows”, a report for the KnowledgeWorks Foundation. “Because we tend to live in neighborhoods that are segregated by race and income you often need to draw from a larger area to get a diverse population.” As a school board member in Decatur, Georgia, John Ahman has grappled with this tension firsthand. To preserve its prized walkable, neighborhood schools, the small city of 19,000 for years has resisted a state guideline that would have meant consolidating their five elementary schools into two. But recently two inescapable realities forced change: The need to close a school with fewer than 80 students and a desire to address a persistent achievement gap in a pair of schools that were predominantly African-American. The solution ultimately was to close two schools, expanding the attendance zones for the remaining campuses so that they would be more racially balanced and create city-wide school for fourth and fifth grades. “It was a brutal battle,” Ahman recalls. “It might have been easier just to consolidate them all into a couple of large schools, but we didn’t want to do that. I hate to say it, but a lot of white people just didn’t want their kids going to school with poorer, black kids.” But the board was determined both to integrate the schools and to make it possible for families to continue to get their kids to school without driving. “To make them walkable, we posted 14 crossing guards to make it safer to cross our busier roads,” in addition to installing crosswalks and traffic controls. Recognizing the reality that the Decaturs of the world have faced, some small-schools advocates suggest breaking up larger campuses into several schools-within-a-school. One frequently cited success story in this regard is New York City’s Julia Richman Education Complex. Once a failing, violence-plagued school of thousands, the sprawling compound has been divided into six schools, each with a different theme and identity. A Washington Post article on the complex described it like this: “There is no public address system and no bells announce the end of class. The metal detectors … have disappeared, along with cages for particularly violent students. Vandalism … and fights in the hallway are rare. The number of students graduating and going on to college has shot up.” What makes places like Richman work, says Weiss, is not merely making the schools smaller, but also selecting administrators and faculty who share a vision, and giving them the extra resources needed to succeed. In any case, advocacy for small schools won’t succeed if done in a vacuum that disregards other community issues, he cautions. “In a way small schools are one part of the larger smart-growth puzzle,” says Weiss. “Communities should be careful about pursuing small schools in isolation from pursuing broader, more integrated Smart-Growth strategies. It’s unlikely small schools by themselves will be a panacea.” David A. Goldberg is the communications director for Smart Growth America, a nationwide coalition based in Washington, D.C. that advocates for land-use policy reform. In 2002, Mr. Goldberg was awarded a Loeb Fellowship at Harvard University where he studied urban policy. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 11
Slide 11: reading writing REALTORS Working to ® 12 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 12: & Real Estate by Carol Everett here are many practical steps a REALTOR® can take to make a difference in their communities in the education arena. Here are three case studies of successful initiatives by REALTOR® associations: Improve Public Education T Providing Direct Assistance to Local Schools—Williamson County, Tennessee Helen Carter, a one-time special education teacher, now serves as the chief executive officer of the Williamson County Association of REALTORS® (WCAR). Since 1993, Carter has looked for every opportunity to use WCAR resources to improve the public schools in Williamson County. Carter says her members have been more than willing to follow her lead because they understand that one of the primary reasons corporate executives have flocked to this picturesque community, less than 20 minutes from downtown Nashville, is they want the best public school system they can find for their children. Currently, Williamson County has delivered one of the best in the state. “No matter where you live in Williamson County,” says Carter, “you can find quality public schools for your children.” Williamson County also has big plans to make the region a center for science and technology, and if it wants to succeed with these ambitious plans, it will need to demonstrate that it has a superior educational system, starting with its primary and secondary schools. Here are the major ways WCAR supports its community schools, all of which can be easily emulated by other REALTOR® associations: • Scholarships These $1,000-scholarships allow one graduating senior from each of Williamson County’s high schools to continue their education at either a college or a vocational school. WCAR takes applications from all of its five high schools; narrows them down to three per school based on outside activities, grades, parent’s income and need; and then interviews the finalists to choose one from each school. The scholarships are financed through an annual fundraiser. “Our goal,” says Carter, “is to help that one kid who might not otherwise get to further his or her education without that first leg up. This [is one of] the best things we do as an association.” • Reading to children at school Periodically the school district contacts Carter for volunteers to read in the schools. “When a REALTOR® goes out and reads to a classroom full of kids,” says Carter, “it’s a way for him or her to give back to the community.” It’s also a good way, she says, for them to get more name recognition. “I know for a fact those children go home and tell their parents about Mrs. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 13
Slide 13: Cirulli who came in and read to them today.” Some REALTORS® have made even bigger commitments. One REALTOR®, for example, adopted a class for six weeks, going in once a week to explain about different aspects of buying and selling a house. “This was a really smart approach,” says Carter, “because when those kids’ parents decide to move, guess what REALTOR® is going to come first to their minds.” • The Groundhog Job Shadowing Program Students spend a day “shadowing” adults to find out more about certain careers—in this case, real estate professional. • The Tenured Teacher Appreciation Event At the end of the school year students honor their teachers by giving them a pin for “x” number of years of service. WCAR participates in this event by asking its members to sponsor door prizes handed out at the end of the program. “The teachers love that our membership supports them in this manner,” says Carter. • School Superintendent’s Business Council The goal, says Carter, was to brainstorm about ways the business community could play a larger role in assisting the local school system. Examples of recommendations included asking businesses to donate their computer equipment instead of throwing it away when they upgrade and inviting corporate executives to headline more fundraising events. Working Collaboratively to Market Local Schools and Neighborhoods—Madison, Wisconsin “At Home In Madison” Project Madison REALTORS® knew they had a problem when one of their affiliate members, Home Savings Bank, told them the results of a customer focus group. Despite having one of the best school districts in the nation, many families relocating to the area were not giving Madison a moment’s thought as a place to live due to a commonly-held belief that all central cities have poor public schools. “This bias against the Metropolitan Madison School District was frustrating,” says Kevin King, Executive Vice President of the REALTORS® Association of South Central Wisconsin (RASCW), “because on any objective measure Madison schools have an excellent record to share with prospective new students and their parents.” But Madison REALTORS® weren’t the only ones who were being hurt by this misperception, so were Madison schools, which were clearly losing out on quality students. For that matter, so was the city of Madison, which was seeing strong middle class families—along with their tax dollars— bypass it for the suburbs. Madison REALTORS® and school administrators concluded the problem was the city wasn’t getting its story out. Not only has Madison been named “best place for education” by Money Magazine, but it has the highest ACT scores in the state; record-level SAT scores; experienced, award-winning teachers; and a record-winning number of national merit scholars. Understanding they had a marketing problem, the RASCW joined with the Madison Metropolitan School District, the city of Madison, and Home Savings Bank to launch a two-school pilot to demonstrate a mechanism for getting timely information into the hands of homebuyers about Madison’s award-winning schools and vibrant neighborhoods. The benefits of the program were so obvious, that after the first year, it was expanded to include all Madison elementary, middle and high schools. At first the data was available only in paper form, but quickly it was shifted to a public website (athomein.com), which was much less expensive to maintain and easier to keep current. Now on the “At Home In Madison” website, REALTORS® and their clients can find detailed information about every public school in the city, including performance data such as average SAT and ACT scores. Also provided is a “principal/parent contact” roster so potential homebuyers can arrange for a school tour or talk to another family who has children at a particular school. “What’s great about At Home In Madison,” says King, “is you get this same set of data for every 14 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 14: one of the schools in the whole city, and it’s organized so you see a high school and all the feeder schools going into it.” A clear win-win for everyone, the metropolitan school district loves the program because it acts as a frontline advertiser for the public schools. The REALTORS® love it because it provides answers to the question uppermost on the minds of most homebuyers: what’s the quality of the local schools? The program has been extremely successful. In fact, the statewide teachers union and state department of public instruction are now interested in taking the model to other major metropolitan areas in Wisconsin. Working Collaboratively to Ensure Local Schools Are Adequately Financed—Palm Beach County, Florida In Palm Beach County the REALTORS® and the school district worked together to get a referendum passed that will increase the local sales tax by onehalf penny in order to raise $560 million for school construction and modernization starting in 2005. REALTOR® Association of Palm Beach (RAPB) didn’t question whether more money was needed for school construction in Palm Beach County. What RAPB was questioning, however, was whether the one-third mill property tax increase proposed by the school board was the most efficient way to finance more schools. The question seemed reasonable because neighboring Orange County had finally passed a school construction referendum just two years earlier after two decades of failed attempts. The difference this time around was the school board had come up with a plan—a one-half cent sales tax increase paired with a half-mill property tax rollback—the business community could get solidly behind. The business community’s active involvement in the referendum’s campaign helped allay voter’s concerns about financial accountability RAPB contracted with an economic consulting firm to do a comparative study of a one-third mill versus a one-half cent sales tax increase. The study concluded that the one-half cent sales tax increase was the sounder funding alternative because it was capable of generating significantly more revenue per year than a one-third mill property tax ($93 million compared to only $23 million in year 1 alone). This meant that the $560 million capital needs program could be funded in six years under the sales tax alternative versus 14 years for the property tax option, avoiding millions of dollars in administrative and finance charges. Another benefit of a sales tax increase was that it would broaden the base on which the tax was being applied to include seasonal visitors. Armed with its study results, RAPB lobbied hard to persuade the school board to support a Never underestimate the leverage REALTORS® can have. one-half cent sales tax increase instead of a onethird mill property tax increase. RAPB overcame the opposition by aligning itself with other business entities and by committing to take responsibility for getting the school referendum passed if it was based on a sales tax increase. To fulfill its pledge to the school board, RAPB subsequently formed a coalition of public and private leaders to run the referendum campaign, raising close to half a million dollars to cover the campaign’s costs. It also created a 25-member advisory committee made up of the county’s most powerful CEOs and CFOs to certify that the school board did in fact need $560 million, and commissioned polling to develop effective messages. Finally, it mobilized its members to undertake grassroots efforts, such as letters to the editor, putting out signs, and going door-to-door to talk to voters. Says RAPB government affairs director Jennifer Butler, “This was basically a political campaign except instead of running an elected official we were running an issue.” The lesson from these stories: Never underestimate the leverage REALTORS® can have. Carol T. Everett is the owner of Everett Consulting Services based in Washington, D.C. Everett Consulting Services specializes in writing and advising on livable communities and related issues. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 15
Slide 15: The ABCs of Smart Growth spell out the Community Community school advocates and leaders of the Smart Growth movement use the same principles and partnerships to promote better schools for our children. Photos contributed by Cathy Gray and the Evansville Vanderburgh School. 16 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 16: hen her children experienced behavior problems after B. G. Gray ended an abusive relationship, the Portland, Oregon, home care worker knew where to turn for help—her daughter’s school. The school, Earl Boyles Elementary School, is a community school located in a tough neighborhood known as “Felony Flats” on the east side of Portland. If offers a wide array of after-school programs, coun- W SchoolVision by John Van Gieson seling, health care and social services to students and parents, like Gray, who need help. “My kids and I came out of very bad abuse, and they helped us a lot,” Gray said. “I don’t think we would have made it without their help and support.” After transferring to Earl Boyles from a regular school, “my kids actually started making progress in their personal life, their attitudes and their behavior, as well as their grades,” she said. Her daughter, who once hated to get up in the morning to go to school, actually looked forward to the classes she took in the Schools Uniting Neighborhoods (SUN) program at Earl Boyles, Gray said. “Our SUN community schools are our best tool to help ensure at-risk kids are able to learn in school and stay out of trouble after the school day ends,” said Multnomah County Chair Diane Linn. “This helps not only these children and their families, but our whole community.” The concept of merging social services into schools dates to the late 1800s when desperately poor immigrant children were crowding urban schools, but the movement has really taken off over the last 15 to 20 years, fueled in part by a new wave of immigration. A community school is a school where local partners join forces with the school district to provide before and after school programs meeting the educa- WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 17
Slide 17: Perhaps the most impressive argument for community schools is that their ability to engage students and parents leads to dramatic improvements in grades and test scores. tional, health, mental health and social services needs of the students, their parents and the community at large. Community schools are usually open from early morning until late evening. “It’s like a one-stop shop for families,” said Suzanne Yeager, executive director of communications for the Saint Paul, Minnesota, public schools. Community schools are tailored to meet community needs, with parents and community members involved in determining what kind of programs they want at their school, resulting in considerable differences between programs, even in the same district. School districts typically set rigid academic standards for their community schools and staff them with exceptional principals and teachers. Services the students receive include medical referrals, dental clinics, vision screening, counseling, after-school programs, arts classes, sports programs and drug, violence and pregnancy prevention programs. Services provided to parents include parenting classes, English classes for immigrants and assistance in negotiating the maze of social services. Community school counselors help parents resolve basic issues such as food and housing that affect their children’s ability to succeed in school. Wilma Goudy, a family intervention specialist at Earl Boyles, helped a single father with two sons attending the school get back on his feet after they were evicted from their apartment. Goudy works for Metropolitan Family Services, which partners with 10 community schools in the Portland area. “To make a long story short, there were three of us from different agencies that paid money for his apartment, and he was able to move from temporary housing to permanent housing,” she said. “We were able to furnish the apartment, get the kids beds and assist with food and the electric bill.” Now, Goudy said, the boys “are doing really well. They’re both in school. It’s a big deal for their self-esteem, their self-worth. It’s really uncomfortable for a kid to come to school and say, ‘We’re homeless.’” To succeed, community schools need outside partners, and the impetus to develop full-service schools in a particular community often comes from outside the school system. In Portland, it was city and county government. In New York City, it’s the Children’s Aid Society, a 153 year-old social services agency that focuses on meeting the needs of children. In Saint Paul, the driving force was the Amherst H. Wilder Foundation, founded in 1906 by a prominent local businessman. “What’s unique about this new focus on community schools is it’s not just the schools that are leading the effort, it’s the United Way, social service organizations, philanthropies, cities, counties and universities,” said Martin J. Blank, staff director of the Coalition for Public Schools in Washington, D.C. It takes a big table when members of the School Community Council of the Evansville Vanderburgh School Corporation in Evansville, Indiana, meet to discuss their 21st Century Community Learning Centers program serving 10 schools. “We have 65 to 70 community agencies sitting at the table actively collaborating,” said Cathlin Gray, assistant superintendent of the Evansville Vanderburgh schools. “At each of the 21st Century Schools 18 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 18: there is a site council, and the site council is school-based. Members include parents, teachers and community agencies.” Perhaps the most impressive argument for community schools is that their ability to engage students and parents leads to dramatic improvements in grades and test scores. In a report entitled “Making the Difference, Research and Practice in Community Schools,” the Coalition for Community Schools assessed the results of programs in 20 schools reaching from Boston to Carson, California. “Fifteen of the 20 initiatives in this study reported improvement in student academic achievement, as measured by improved grades in school courses and scores in proficiency testing,” the report said. In one year, Dayton’s Bluff Achievement Plus Elementary School in Saint Paul reported gains of 35 percent in math scores and 28 percent in reading scores on the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment test, according to a Saint Paul Public Schools case study report entitled “The Transformation.” This in a school where up to 80 percent of the teachers used to call in sick on a given day, the report said. “We cleared out a lot of bad housing. We’re systemically upgrading the neighborhood.” At Cedar Hall Elementary School in Evansville, Cathlin Gray said, the number of students passing Indiana’s state test has increased from 23 percent to 65 percent. “We got raw improvements across the board,” she said. “But we’re not there yet.” Turning an under-achieving school in a neighborhood riddled with social problems into a community school that compares favorably with the better suburban schools is no easy task, as a number of school systems have learned. It took several years, key changes of administrators and a restructuring demanded by the major partner, the Wilder Foundation, for the Achievement Plus community school program to deliver results in Saint Paul. “We had an agenda for school reform, and we WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 19
Slide 19: Community schools require a commitment by educators, support by community leaders, involvement of parents, and the participation of dedicated partners. felt if we got the right services and staff in place we could dramatically change how low-income kids learn,” said Tom Kingston, president of the Wilder Foundation. “It’s taken us seven years, but we’ve finally gotten there. In the last two years we’ve gotten incredible test scores. Dayton’s Bluff is catching up with the suburban schools.” Advocates say the nuturing nature of community schools fosters a sense of safety and security in the school that has a positive impact on the surrounding community. In New York, the Children’s Aid Society runs 13 community schools in partnership with the city school system. The flagship school, Intermediate School 218, is located in the Washington Heights section of Manhattan, serving a lower-income neighborhood comprised largely of immigrants from the Dominican Republic. As the school was being developed in the early 1990s, Washington Heights had the city’s most crowded schools and one of its highest crime rates. It was known for drug dealers who catered to suburban buyers and was racked by several days of rioting after a police officer shot and killed a drug dealer in 1993. Today, I.S. 218, also known as the Salome Urena Middle Academies after a famous Dominican poet and educator, is a model school in a neighborhood where the crime rate has dropped dramatically. Washington Heights has become one of New York’s hottest real estate markets. “There were hardly any services before the community school,” said Hersilia Mendez, assistant director of the Children’s Aid Society program at I.S. 218. “I really believe that we made a difference.” ommunity school advocates and leaders of the Smart Growth movement have joined forces in an informal alliance promoting community schools as a focal point of both new communities and the restoration of decaying inner city neighborhoods. They are drawing strength from education reformers who have concluded that small schools are better for kids than the megaschools that school districts have tended to build on vacant land on the edge of town. Their research shows that children attending smaller schools get better grades, participate more in school activities and are more likely to go to college. C As Sam Passmore put it in a Funders’ Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities report on Education and Smart Growth, “The interests of Smart Growth advocates and education reformers converge on a simple, but powerful idea, the small neighborhood school.” Especially when those small neighborhood schools are community schools. In an article for the American School Board Journal, Washington, D.C., consultants Barbara McCann and Constance Beaumont outlined these characteristics of Smart Growth schools: • Small in size. • Broad community involvement. • High-quality education. • Students can walk to school. • Serve as community schools. • Good fit for the neighborhood. • Use existing facilities wherever possible. Some Smart Growth developers are incorporating community schools into the new communities they are building. In Florida, the developers of Lake Nona, an 8,000-acre planned community four miles southeast of the Orlando International Airport, built the NorthLake Park Community School and leased it back to the Orange County School District. The Lake Nona Land Company partnered with the YMCA and the Orlando Regional Healthcare System to offer fitness and wellness programs at the school. 20 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 20: Following the riots, the school worked to defuse tensions between the community and the police. “Through the school we started to work with the police and the students in getting to know each other and the students are actually teaching the police Spanish,” Mendez said. In Saint Paul, Kingston said, the changes at Dayton’s Bluff school have had a positive impact on the housing market. His foundation is developing affordable housing in the area. “It was one of the key factors in turning around the real estate market,” he said. “We cleared out a lot of bad housing. We’re systemically upgrading the neighborhood.” The community school movement is growing rapidly, but many challenges remain. To develop successful community schools, Blank said, requires a commitment by educators, support by community leaders, involvement of parents, and the participation of dedicated partners. “Historically, schools have tended to be isolated,” he said. “School officials like to be in charge. After 10 to 15 years of pressure for accountability, many school leaders have begun to reach out to others they need to bring in if our schools are going to succeed.” John Van Gieson is a freelance writer based in Tallahassee, Florida. He owns and runs Van Gieson Media Relations, Inc. The merger of the community school, smaller schools and Smart Growth movements typically occurs when planners are building new schools or renovating old ones as integral components of plans to revitalize deteriorated inner city neighborhoods. One of the best examples of a new inner city school that merges the community school concept with Smart Growth principles is the Tenderloin Community School located in a blighted San Francisco neighborhood with a large population of Asian immigrants. The school was developed under the leadership of the Bay Area Women and Children’s Center, which worked closely with neighborhood residents to design a school that met their needs. The result: a colorful new building, serving 540 students, that includes a community center, medical and dental facilities, an adult education center, a community kitchen and a roof garden. (See page 52.) As part of a massive project to redevelop blighted downtown areas along the Tennessee River, Chattanooga officials built two new magnet schools serving the inner city, the Battle Academy of Teaching and Learning and the Brown Academy of Classical Studies. The Brown Academy was built with private funds. The 425-student Adams School in downtown St. Louis, Missouri, is frequently cited as an outstanding example of a renovation project that relies on Smart Growth principles to provide better service to a rundown inner city neighborhood. The $12.6 million cost of renovating two vacant school buildings that were constructed in the late 1800s and adding a modern addi- tion was shared by a public-private partnership that included the Washington University Medical Center, Firstart Bank, the BarnesJewish Hospital Foundation and the St. Louis Board of Education. The St. Louis Cardinals baseball team paid for recreational facilities. The school was renovated as part of a $180 million plan to restore the Forest Park Southeast neighborhood. The community center includes a teen center, weight room, police substation, laundry facilities, community offices and adult education programs. The state of New Jersey has made community schools the centerpiece of an $8.6 billion plan to revitalize distressed neighborhoods. The state is urging local school districts to locate recreation and fitness, arts, health care and workforce training into the community schools built under the program. The idea of smaller schools is gaining acceptance, but the movement has been hampered by old attitudes and requirements that promote construction of large new schools. In many states spacious campuses are required when new schools are built and the “two thirds” rule holds that an old school should not be renovated if the cost is more than two-thirds the cost of building a new school. Such attitudes, regulations and law must be changed in many places in order to develop Smart Growth schools. “When considering the transition to small neighborhood schools, local officials need to be reassured that they are not reinventing the wheel,” Passmore said. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 21
Slide 21: Many public-private partnerships, using Smart Growth fundamentals, are being formed to help ensure that school districts keep pace with population increases, development and parental demands. partnerships smart Photos contributed by the Norm A Uhl, HISD Press Office; Ramon Sanchez of the Miami-Dade County Public Schools; Aaron Kindel, Development Director for Imagine Schools; Monte Lange of the Cortez Park Charter School; and Adrian Catarzi of the City’s Middle Charter School at the Central Campus. ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005 22
Slide 22: smart schools by Brad Broberg construct W hen Hurricane Andrew blasted South Florida in 1992, Pembrooke Pines and the rest of southwest Broward County escaped the horrific destruction the killer storm unleashed on much of neighboring Dade County. Even so, Andrew left his mark. Thousands of devastated Dade County families, whose dwellings Andrew flattened, fled north to new homes in places like Pembrooke Pines, where the greater distance from the coast offers greater security against the threat of future hurricanes. As a result, the population of Pembrooke Pines soared. Before Hurricane Andrew, Pembrooke Pines was home to 65,000 people. Today, more than 150,000 peo- WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 23
Slide 23: ple live in the community approximately 20 miles northwest of Miami. “We had prepared for steady development over a long period of time [but] we more than doubled our population in a short time frame,” said Charley Dodge, longtime city manager. Slammed by whirlwind growth, Pembrooke Pines faced pressure to provide public services— and do it fast—for the flood of new residents. The most pressing problem? The need to build more schools. Traditionally, local school districts shoulder that burden. However, the Broward County School District was unprepared to meet the demand, said Dodge. “They did not plan or set aside land or have the capability,” he said. Minus Hurricane Andrew, the Pembrooke Pines story is a familiar tale in high-growth states such as Florida, Arizona and California, where school district after school district struggles to keep up with development. Less familiar—but gaining ground every day— is the approach Pembrooke Pines took to provide the schools its residents needed. Frustrated by the school district’s inertia, the city of Pembrooke Pines partnered with a private company, Haskell Educational Services, to build and operate its own elementary school under Florida’s charter-school law. “We made the decision in December of 1997, broke ground in January of 1998 and opened in August,” said Dodge. Although the partnership has since ended, Pembrooke Pines has opened six more schools serving 5,200 students in grades K–12. Not only School districts struggle to keep up with development. are the city’s schools providing much-needed classrooms, their smaller size and high test scores make them extremely attractive to parents. “We have a waiting list of 11,000 students,” said Dodge. With local state and federal budgets stretched thin, public-private partnerships offer numerous advantages over the traditional approach to opening new schools, say proponents. Mainly, publicprivate partnerships can create schools faster and cheaper, eliminating the need to ask taxpayers to approve general-obligation bonds, to put projects out for bid or to abide by costly regulations governing public works. Plus the private partner has a powerful incentive—namely profits—to be as efficient as possible. The Pembrooke Pines model is one of many forms public-private partnerships are taking. They range from workplace satellite schools to lease-purchase agreements to developer-built schools—all of them supporting Smart Growth’s goal of ensuring infrastructure keeps pace with development. “Any method you can think of has been tried,” said Alan Olkes, senior vice president with Imagine Schools in Coconut Grove, Florida, and the former superintendent of the Miami/Dade County School District. In Washington, D.C., a national real estate company, LCOR, partnered with D.C. Public Schools to build a new elementary school. The school was financed with debt issued by the District of Columbia. The debt was backed by revenue from a 211-unit apartment building LCOR constructed on part of the school site given to LCOR as part of the partnership agreement, explained Lisa Snell, education director for the Reason Public Policy Institute in Los Angeles. In California, residential developers can negotiate with school districts to spend school-impact fees directly on new school construction rather 24 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 24: With local state and federal budgets stretched thin, publicprivate partnerships offer numerous advantages over the traditional approach to opening new schools. than sending the money through bureaucratic channels and waiting for the system to produce a school, said Snell. “The time savings is huge,” she said. Ron Utt, senior research fellow with the Washington, D.C.-based Heritage Foundation, has found that public-private partnerships can trim the cost of building a school by 30 percent and slash the time it takes to plan and open a facility from as many as five years to less than one. Even so, he warns that the push for such partnerships won’t come from school boards. “It’s not going to be the public sector promoting these things,” he said. ”It’s going to be the private sector promoting these things ... to allow more growth to occur.” Three years ago, Congress passed a law intended to take public-private partnerships to a new level. The law allows qualified real estate investors/developers to issue private-activity bonds to finance school construction. By cutting financing costs, the tax-exempt bonds enable private investors/developers to build schools less expensively. And, because the investor/developer owns the school—at least for the length of the lease—it can rent out portions of the building when classes are not in session. As a result, the investor/developer can afford to lease the school to a school district for less than what the district would spend if it built the school itself. What’s more, when the lease expires, the law gives the school district ownership of the school. Unfortunately, the law hamstrings potential partnerships in two ways. First, it limits school construction involving private-activity bonds to less than $3 billion nationwide. Second, regulations written by the U.S. Treasury Department implementing the law forbid investors/developers from claiming any depreciation. As a result, says Utt, only a handful of schools have been built with private-activity bonds. Even so, a few lease/purchase agreements are being executed. TurnKey Solutions is a Temecula, California, design/build contractor. “The company keeps construction costs low by using pre-approved plans to produce componentbuilt schools in half the time and for 20 percent less than conventional construction,” said Tony Vignieri, communications director. Those efficiencies make it possible for TurnKey to finance school construction in-house and lease the buildings to districts unable to foot the upfront bill. “It’s a way out for school districts that are up against the wall,” said Vignieri. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 25
Slide 25: Another version of the lease/purchase approach involves finding a not-for-profit or government partner to issue the debt—something school districts generally cannot do without voter approval. Then the school district signs a lease-purchase agreement with the partner that enables the district to pay for the school over time without asking taxpayers to support a general obligation bond. The Houston Independent School District took that approach to build two high schools. First, the city of Houston established tax increment reinvestment zones in the neighborhoods surrounding the two school sites. Then a public facilities corporation was set up. Based on lease payments from the school district—payments funded primarily by money col- Charter schools and the companies that build and operate them are a popular vehicle for combining public dollars with private initiative. lected within the tax increment reinvestment zones—the public facilities corporation issued debt to build the schools and lease them to the district. “It’s been a very good experience for as because it’s allowed us to build these two badly needed high schools on a pay-as-you go basis,” said Don Boehm, in-house finance attorney for the Houston Independent School District. Charter schools and the companies that build and operate them are a popular vehicle for combining public dollars with private initiative to open schools faster—and often cheaper—than might otherwise occur. As private businesses, charter-school companies are subject to far less red tape, said Doug Bouma, executive vice president of The Bouma Corp., a Michigan general contractor that builds schools for both public school systems and charter-school operators. “It’s a huge advantage when it comes to time and money,” he said. “There’s a night-and-day difference.” Strictly speaking, charter schools may not reflect true public-private partnerships because local school districts only rarely participate as full partners. Yet charter schools do represent public money being spent on a private solution to a community problem. “Whether we like charter schools or not, they are the law in Florida ... and the fact that they are creating (classrooms) is viewed as a benefit overall,” said Michael Bell, assistant superintendent for School Choice/Parental Options with the Miami/Dade County School District. While the process varies from state to state— and some states don’t allow charter schools at all—the basic concept is the same. A charter school proponent submits an application to that state’s particular governing authority. If the application is approved, the charter school’s proponents receive a fixed amount of public money per student to open and operate a school. Charter-school proponents are frequently parents dissatisfied with the quality of their local school. However, in high-growth states, charter schools are frequently inspired by overcrowding. Take Arizona, where Imagine Schools has been “following the growth,” says Nancy Hall, regional vice president with the company’s Phoenix office. “There’s just a real need in Arizona. They can’t put the traditional public schools up fast enough to take care of the growth.” Imagine Schools is one of many companies that establish and/or operate charter schools. They act either on behalf of the school’s proponents or—as is the case with Imagine in Arizona—as the proponent itself. In Arizona, Hall teams with a local REALTOR®, Rick Brandt, to track where new development is headed, conducts demographic studies of promising areas and then applies for approval to open a charter school. So far, Imagine has opened six schools that way, including one in a former furniture store and two in a former hardware store. Two additional schools will open next fall. 26 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 26: Brandt, a broker, said charter schools respond much faster when attractive real estate opportunities arise. The public process “takes way too long,” he said. “In this environment, that’s a critical thing.” Another charter-school strategy is to partner with a developer from the get-go. A current example can be found in Lake County, Florida, where Imagine Schools is partnering with the developer of a large residential community. With no public school on the drawing board, the developer turned to Imagine Schools to satisfy the local planning authority’s demand for a school. The school also will help the developer market the community, said Olkes. Besides being a tool to support Smart Growth, charter schools can lead by opening schools in areas where the local school district can’t justify building a new school but where development is desired. For example, the city of St. Louis is talking with Imagine Schools about opening a downtown charter school as part of a redevelopment initiative, said Olkes. Workplace satellite schools are one more way the public and private sectors can team up to open schools. Although sometimes operated as charter schools, they are often a joint effort between school districts, which provide the teachers and curriculum, and large employers, which provide the facilities. The Miami/Dade County School District opened its first workplace satellite school at the headquarters of American Bankers Assurance Group—now known as Assurance Solutions— in 1987. At one time, the district operated five such schools, but due to various circumstances beyond the district’s control is now down to two schools; Assurance Solutions (K–5) and Mt. Sinai Hospital (K–2). Such arrangements pay mutual dividends. The school district gains classroom space without having to build a new school while the employer gains a tremendous fringe benefit for its workers. In addition, productivity increases. Assurance Solutions’ absentee rate lowered from 11 percent to 6 percent because parents had to come to work in order to get their kids to school. Plus it reduced its turnover rate, said Olkes, superintendent at Miami/Dade, when the Assurance Solutions’ satellite school opened. “Workplace schools are a wonderful thing,” said Olkes. “It’s great to see parents come and have lunch with their kids.” Brad Broberg is a Seattle-based freelance writer specializing in business and development issues. His work appears regularly in the Puget Sound Business Journal and the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 27
Slide 27: 28 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005 Photos contributed by Bruce Guadalupe Community School; and The Accelerated School.
Slide 28: Charter Are They Reinvigorating Public Education? by Jason Miller Schools opportunities for their children. Parents, neighborhoods and new developments are gaining choices when it comes to educational P ublic education in the U.S. started off on the right foot. Schools and classes were manageable, students received adequate attention, curricula were flexible and innovative. But somewhere along the way, public education got complacent—and the students suffered. “Conventional public schools are doing a woeful job of educating kids,” says Jeanne Allen, president of Center for Education Reform (CER) in Washington, D.C. “They’re helping the few, not the many. They’ve become too big, too impersonal. And they’ve become ineffective.” Enter the charter school, arguably the solution to a problem that doesn’t seem to be fixing itself. Funded largely with private donations, grants, loans and public money, charter schools follow many of the same regulations in their respective states, but add a level of accountability and fervent dedication to the hard work of education that seems to be the exception—rather than the norm—in the conventional public school arena. Charter schools got their start after numerous studies demonstrated that the U.S. school system was falling behind most other industrialized nations. In 1991, the first charter school law was enacted in WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 29
Slide 29: Minnesota. In 1992, that state built the first charter school. Today, upwards of 3,300 charter schools have opened their doors for the 2004–05 school year. By most accounts, this movement to reinvigorate the U.S. education system has legs and is here to stay. Path to performance Typically founded by parents, teachers and/or community groups who see a real need in their community, charter schools are controlled by a contract—a charter—between an approved authorizer (e.g., a state university or a state school board) and the governing board of the charter school. This board is similar to a conventional school board; it is publicly accountable for performing at the level the state requires. The regulations that define those expectations vary from state to state, and usually are more stringent for charter schools. Typically, a charter school will have a five-year contract, during which time the school must prove that it’s succeeding. This is serious education: If a charter school doesn’t deliver the goods, it could go out of business. For this reason, charter schools tend to test their students aggressively. According to a report from CER titled “Charter Schools: Changing the Face of American Education,” 94 percent of charter schools reported administering at least one standardized test, with 91 percent administering at least two. What’s the difference? “Charters help parents get back to basics,” says Allen. “They provide choices, more personalized learning environments—and they shake up the conventional public school system.” “They offer flexibility that is not generally able to be implemented in a conventional public school, specifically in available instruction methods (direct instruction or exponential learning or Montessori, for example) used to create an environment that’s good for children. Parents can see what their options are and what would work best for their child. Charters serve kids who have not been well-served by the system in the past.” Those children could be gifted, at-risk, minorities, low-income or special-needs—just to name a few groups. The point is that charter schools reintroduce choice into the equation, then they educate with a zeal that most parents would ascribe to the good old days. If education were a sport, most charter schools would belong to the “extreme” category. Pushed to perform and dedicated to excellence, most charters offer extended school days and an extended school year, for starters. At KIPP DC/Key Academy in Washington, D.C., a stringent teacher-training program starts the process. Every teacher then gets a cell phone and the number is given to the students so if they have a problem while doing their homework, they can call the teacher and deal with it. School is in session from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. every day, plus two to three Saturdays every month. Charters provide choices, more personalized learning environments—and they shake up the conventional public school system. 30 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 30: Charter schools improve a neighborhood’s quality of life mainly because [their residents] have a choice. The personalized approach pays off, says Raymond Rivera, youth development coordinator with Bruce Guadalupe Community School in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. His children, Raymond Rivera, Jr., 12; and Jiselle, 9, attend the Bruce Guadalupe middle school and elementary school, respectively. “I’ve noticed the staff ’s passion,” he says. “They want to not only teach, but build a relationship with the kids. My son tells me the school is different, that it’s more personal. My daughter thinks of it as another kind of home. There’s a culture of high expectations here; everyone wants the kids to succeed.” The benefits spread to charter schools’ immediate communities, too, says Vicki Cox Golder, CRB, a REALTOR® with Vicki Cox & Associates in Tucson, Ariz., and a former school board chair and Governor’s Education Task Force member. “Charter schools improve a neighborhood’s quality of life mainly because [their residents] have a choice. If parents are given a choice that’s affordable for them, that improves the quality of life in a community. That’s why charter schools got started in Arizona, because the parents and kids were stuck because of geographics and socio-economic situations. A parent should have a choice, but they didn’t. “In Arizona, they were given a choice to use public funds that were allocated to charter schools. And they took advantage of that opportunity. We now have the second-largest number of charter schools in the nation.” Charter challenges Not surprisingly, funding comes into play when the subject of charter school hurdles arises. State by state, each charter school is responsible for obtaining its funding and securing a site and a building suitable for its efforts. Common financial sources include banks and credit enhancement organizations—private/public bodies that provide what amounts to a second mortgage for the school. Some lending entities, such as National Capital Bank, are both lenders and credit enhancers. Sallie Mae and the Charter Schools Development Corporation also fund charter schools. The challenge of funding cannot be understated, however. Because charter schools are not a “education as usual” effort, they often face difficulty when trying to get a loan. That’s when they get creative—sometimes with help from their individual states. In Minnesota and the District of Columbia, for example, facilities funding is available for charter schools on a per-pupil basis. California offers a charter school revolving loan fund, which makes low-cost loans to charter WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 31
Slide 31: Even after a charter school is up and running, the funding issue usually continues. schools for facilities. Grants, private and corporate donations, and other government funds are often combined to meet a school’s funding needs. Sometimes advocacy is in order. Financial consulting firm Charter FS Corporation of Westerville, Ohio, pursues all manner of funding solutions for charter schools. Its president, Peter Svahn, serves as a liaison between charter schools and potential lenders, such as banks. Since many charter schools don’t have equity to secure a traditional loan, Svahn educates bank officials so that they’re more comfortable with the prospect of lending to a charter school. “Typically, charter schools are formed by educators who tend not to focus on the business issues of running a school,” he says. “We help schools develop an appropriate business plan and strategy to help them present their case to the financial community.” Even with adequate funding, resistance to charter schools can still arise, says Jeanne Allen. “Some school districts welcome the competition; others make life difficult for [charter schools]. Sometimes it’s the local school board with the power to authorize a charter school’s creation; they might create obstacles because they’re concerned about the competition with the conventional public school, and they might think they’ll lose the children to the charter school. “But there need not be tension. The tension tends to come from people who feel threatened. And the reason they’re threatened is the reason that charter schools came to exist in the first place: The conventional public school is doing a poor job of educating its kids.” But the same can be said of charter schools as a whole, says the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). In their report released in August 2004, the AFT contended that charter school students nationally performed worse in math and reading than their regular public school counterparts. The claim is based on charter school achievement results from the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) test, which, according to the AFT, showed that charter school students mostly underperform and sometimes score about as well as regular public school students. “These NAEP data reinforce years of independent research that show charter schools do no better and often underperform comparable, regular public schools,” says F. Howard Nelson, lead author of the AFT report, quoted on the Wisconsin Education Association Council Web site. Resistance can also come in the form of entrenched legislation. Local regulations, such as zoning codes, can make life difficult for new charters. During the inception of the Basis Charter School of Tucson, the school’s original planned site was occupied by a house and not zoned for commercial, which is how schools are often incorrectly categorized. The zoning board and the local community fought the school on the basis of increased traffic and delayed the school’s preparation process to the point where school officials finally had to look elsewhere for a suitable site. Even after a charter school is up and running, the funding issue usually continues. While charter schools receive some public financing, it is never at the same level as the conventional public schools. According to the CER report, the average per-pupil support from the public coffers is $813 less than that given to conventional public schools. 32 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 32: Why the disparity? “That’s the way charter school laws were enacted in the early 1990s,” says Mary Kayne Heinze, CER media relations director. “Charters are supposed to be leaner and meaner, expected to do more with less. I think that was the initial logic behind putting the funding so low. Now we realize that while they tend to spend less than the schools in their host district, they still need more money than that, in order to have quality teachers.” Bright future Charter school success stories are numerous, but there are standouts. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the Bruce Guadalupe Community School (BGCS) serves preschoolers, elementary-school age, and middle-school children. Since receiving its charter school status in 2000, the school has expanded to nearly 600 students, about 97 percent of which are Hispanic and about 80 percent coming from lowincome families. The school boasts a 96 percent attendance rate and a 97 percent retention rate of returning students from year to year. Ninety-five percent of students who graduated four years ago completed high school in 2002. Principal Mary Beth Kuxhause attributes the school’s success to a strong curriculum, good parent background, an extended school day, and mandatory summer school, among many other efforts. “This is a community-based school that doesn’t stop at 3 p.m.,” she says. “We have an after-school program that runs till 6 p.m. Our emphasis is education, education, education. It helps to keep education right at the front of [our students’] heads. We expect our kids to do their very best.” Similar stories are found at the Arizona School for the Arts in Phoenix, The Accelerated School in Los Angeles, and the Henry Ford Academy in Dearborn, Michigan; all three schools were part of a select list of “Best Bets” compiled by CER. What’s next for charter schools? More integration into new traditional neighborhoods, suggests Jeanne Allen. “When building a new neighborhood, why not offer to build a school or two? Or even three? One could be a charter school, one could be a public school, and the third could be a private school or some kind of hybrid. You’d end up with more personalized choices, a better neighborhood, more diversity, and more parent-power over the education process. You’d end up with better schools.” Jason Miller is a freelance writer, editor, photographer, and publishing consultant based in St. Paul, Minnesota. CHARTER SCHOOLS AND BUILDING FACILITIES: WHERE DO YOU LOCATE THEM? he successes of charter schools go hand in hand with a common challenge: How do you address the issue of facilities? Monetary issues prevent many schools from buying a building or building in a new location—but not always, says Jeanne Allen, president of Center for Education Reform in Washington, D.C. “Take Franklin Academy in Wake County, N.C., for example,” she says. “They were able to secure land and break ground on a new building. They’ve paid off their first bank loan and they’re expanding. They’ve done this within their operating budget. They involved themselves with savvy business people to guarantee their loan, but they never needed [additional funds] beyond what most people need for buildings. Now, their scores are unbelievable; they have one of the better charter schools in North Carolina.” T Where land is plentiful, funding for new facilities is generally easier to secure. But where real estate is more difficult to find, charter schools have been obliged to get creative—renovating and reusing existing structures. Too often, a bureaucratic morass must be navigated to use existing public schools, so charter school officials look to other buildings. They renovate church halls, storefronts, and office space. They fill out old homes and community centers. In Washington, D.C., Cesar Chavez Public Policy Charter High School is in a former laundromat. “In the last couple years, charter schools have begun to make use of REALTORS®,” says Allen. “That wasn’t always a natural move, but now they’re going to REALTORS® to help them find something—which makes sense.” The path to securing facilities is almost as varied as the number of charter schools. Schools with a proven track record, or a school that is a “replication” of an existing school, typically start by identifying the property they want to renovate or the land on which they want to build. They then sign a formal contract with their authorizer. Once this authorizing partner is identified, the search usually begins for a credit enhancer to supplement the primary lender’s loan. Once these two entities are found and contracted with, the renovation or new building usually begins. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 33
Slide 33: high sch performance Photos contributed by Heinz Rudolf of Boora Architects, Inc. courtesy of Michael Mathers for the Clackamas High School; and Dr. Rich Bauscher of the Middleton School District, Idaho. 34 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 34: ools by Heidi Johnson-Wright Green/sustainable school buildings create healthier students, happier parents and more attractive Smart Growth neighborhoods. tudents begin each school day by walking through a sundappled grove of trees, which gently shades the main entry way. They are drawn into a building that, instead of resembling a prison, is bathed in natural light streaming in from windows and skylights. From the dining area, students enjoy a breath-taking view of Mount Hood on the horizon. On the nearby grounds, six acres of carefully preserved wetlands are available as a learning lab. The students at Clackamas High School in Portland, Oregon, are immersed in the benefits of a high performance school. “Schools are incredibly important places. Within them are invisible networks that determine whether students perform well or not. They are the backbone of society, an imprint for life. If they’re not done well, there are serious consequences,” said Heinz Rudolf, a principal with Boora Architects, Inc. of Portland, Oregon. Rudolf should know. His firm prides itself on the design of schools—including Clackamas—using high performance principles, resulting in facilities that are cost effective, energy efficient, comfortable, sustainable and environmentally friendly. Clackamas, opened in April 2002, aptly fits these criteria. It was built at a cost of just $117 per square foot, as compared with typical high schools built at a cost of about $135–145 per square foot. The school uses such things as day lighting, natural convection ventilation and impact-resistant, sound-absorbent materials to create a healthy, technologically-sustainable environment. But the school is about more than just the bottom line. Clackamas is an inviting, aesthetically-pleasing place to be. “When we design based on functionalism, we must make sure that every piece has a meaning, in a holistic way,” Rudolf said. Clackamas is a good example of this. Its internal spaces are designed for both interaction and privacy. “When you enter, the space is uplifting. It is day lit everywhere. Behavioral scientists and psychologists say that daylight influences one’s ability to learn, it impacts test scores. Daylight is free and better than artificial light … the windows connect people to the outside through beautiful views,” said Rudolf “A school should be on the opposite end of the spectrum from a jail cell, which exists for punishment,” he added. Most people—parents, teachers, taxpayers and certainly students—would agree. But although the public may understand concepts of optimum form and function, the term “high performance” is still new to many. “If you ask someone ‘Do you want a high performance school?’ They’ll probably answer ‘maybe,’” said Ted Bardacke, an Associate with Global Green USA, an environmental nonprofit organization headquartered in Los Angeles. S WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 35
Slide 35: “But if you ask someone ‘Do you want your kids educated in a school that provides natural daylight, reduces mold, saves money and protects the environment?’ They’ll answer ‘Yes,’” he said. Bardacke’s hypothetical question neatly sums up many of the benefits associated with high performance schools. Such schools are part of a growing network of community-driven, voluntary partnerships that foster energy efficiency and conserve resources in commercial, government and public-housing buildings. They promote Smart Growth principles that draw people into communities to live and work. These schools—some new builds, others retrofitted— conserve energy, save money, reduce pollution and help revitalize aging cities and neighborhoods. High performance schools also help municipalities address whatever regional environmental problems they may be facing, such as water use, storm water management, air quality, recycling or mold problems. But the benefits go beyond increased dollars and decreased landfills. High performance schools can have a real impact on the education experience for the students who attend them. Bardacke said that there are generally two things a school district wants. “Good attendance, because in some instances funds get allocated to districts based upon average daily attendance, which is also often a good predictor of childhood health. And higher test scores. There are studies that show a correlation between high performance schools and test scores.” Bardacke underscores his point by citing a statistic from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that childhood asthma—a condition often associated with poor indoor environmental air quality—is the number one cause of school absenteeism linked to a chronic childhood condition. It’s not just student health at stake. Factor in faculty and administrative staff, and one in five Americans either works in or attends a school facility every day, for an average of six–eight hours daily. Schools are the backbone of society, an imprint for life. If they’re not done well, there are serious consequences. 36 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 36: Better learning environments mean a better educational experience, which also fuels urban revitalization. “There is a high correlation between excellence in text scores and real estate values. Good schools raise property values,” Bardacke said. Consequently, more people are demanding high performance schools. “It is overwhelmingly important to have a good learning environment for students,” said Dr. Rich Bauscher, Superintendent of the Middleton School District in Middleton, Idaho. “Parents tell us that their kids’ attitude and desire to learn are attributable to the aspects of high performance schools.” For example, providing ample daylight enables students to see well. Avoiding dark, subdued areas and providing the right colors in the decorative scheme can have a significant effect upon students’ moods and behavior. “With the right lighting and colors, kids are less apt to be in bad moods and show disciplinary problems,” said Bauscher, whose district’s graffiti problem has been drastically reduced, thanks largely to high performance design. Purple Sage Elementary School, which opened in fall 2003, is one of the Middleton District’s shining examples of high performance principles at work. Natural light, plentiful windows, and light colors create a cheerful interior environment. Climate controls These schools— some new builds, others retrofitted—conserve energy, save money, reduce pollution and help revitalize aging cities and neighbohoods. HIGH PERFORMANCE SCHOOL RESOURCES Architects, engineers, educators and others interested in high performance design should visit the website for the Collaborative for High Performance Schools, which can be found at www.chps.net. The Collaborative’s goal is to facilitate the design of high performance schools: environments that are not only energy efficient, but also healthy, comfortable, well lit, and contain the amenities needed for a quality education. There’s no cost to become a CHPS school, and the program offers free training for project managers, engineers, architects, school district administrators and the general public. Rebuild America is a growing network of communitydriven voluntary partnerships that foster energy efficiency and renewable energy in commercial, government and public-housing buildings. At the federal level, it is the largest, most established technology deployment program within DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). The program’s goals are to: conserve energy, accelerate use of the best energy technologies, save money, reduce air pollution, lower U.S. reliance on energy imports, help revitalize aging city and town neighborhoods, and create “smart energy” jobs. Visit the Rebuild America website at: www.rebuild.org At www.hpschooldesigntraining.com, design and engineering professionals specializing in sustainable design for K–12 schools can take free on-line training on such topics as: lighting and electrical systems, day lighting and windows, mechanical and ventilation systems, water conservation, recycling systems, resource efficient building products and more. Check out http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schools/toolkit.html, which features the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Indoor Air Quality Tools for Schools Kit. This free kit shows schools how to carry out a practical plan of action to improve indoor air problems at little or no cost using straightforward activities and in-house staff. The kit can be downloaded from the website or ordered by telephone at: 1-800-438-4318. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 37
Slide 37: are electronic, delivering precisely comfortable temperatures. “Restroom lighting is electronically controlled with sensors; it goes on when someone enters and goes off when they exit. The same is true for maintenance closets and storage areas, which is great for custodial personnel, who may have their arms full of supplies,” explained Bauscher. The school’s toilets have automatic flushers. The sinks have automatic faucets which dispense water only when needed. Both decrease water waste and janitorial workload. “We had an open house at Purple Sage, and the parents were ecstatic. They really appreciate this,” said Bauscher, referring to the school’s pro-student, environmentally-friendly features. Anna Orrison, a parent of a first-grader at Purple Sage and a member of the district’s Future Sites Committee, said that the quality of the Middleton schools played a major role in her family’s choice of where to live. She is enthralled with the pleasant environment at Purple Sage. “Different wings (of the school) use different colors. The color coding system is a simple and comforting system for young children. It makes it easy for them to find their classrooms. The school also has beautiful light and big rooms,” said Orrison. But it’s not just new buildings in Middleton that have high performance aspects. The district has retrofitted some older buildings as well. “Some of the older buildings used incandescent lights. These were all replaced with fluorescent lights that are energy efficient. The buildings have been repainted with lighter colors,” said Bauscher, who pointed out that new lighting, painting and carpeting can be done relatively cheaply if a school district has relatively few dollars to work with. Middleton is the fifth fastest growing district in the state of Idaho. As it expands by adding new facilities and expanding old ones, high performance concepts will remain a permanent part of the process. Skeptics maintain that the approach adds red tape and delay to the creation of new facilities, a process already made cumbersome by funding and siting issues. Good schools raise property values. Bauscher acknowledges that the process is front-loaded in terms of effort, that such concepts must be incorporated from the very beginning. The traditional linear method of starting with the architect, then on to the engineer, then the contractor doesn’t work. The process must be an integrated one from its inception. When done correctly, proponents say, the approach takes no longer from start to finish than the conventional method. Bauscher maintains that the end result is worth it, given the benefits to students and the environment, as well as lower operating costs. “If we create a school, it will be there for 75–100 years. Why not do it right from the start?” said Bauscher. 38 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 38: WHAT IS A HIGH PERFORMANCE SCHOOL? (As defined by the Collaborative for High Performance Schools) It’s not just school administrators who can make high performance schools a reality. REALTORS® can play a role, too, by pushing for schools to be built with energy-efficient features, sustainable materials, day lighting and better indoor air quality. The result is better schools, cost savings to the district, healthier children, higher test scores and clients who want to buy homes in areas served by these schools. Sherry Maupin, a REALTOR® with Woodhouse Group in Middleton, Idaho, and a Middleton school board member, urges other REALTORS® to get involved with their local school districts. “Run for school board or at least attend their meetings. Become involved with PTA or PTO,” said Maupin. As a school board member, she is able to learn about what surrounding districts are doing and also about national academic statistics for schools. She stays involved with local developers to find out what they are doing within the community, and thus where expansion will occur. “I also keep up with what’s been approved by the local planning and zoning board,” she said. As a member of Middleton’s Future Sites Committee, Maupin pushes for “forward thinking.” When she joined the committee, she advised them to do a five-year and a 10year plan. The committee studies things like areas of the community where there’s population growth and areas where it’s likely to occur, socio-economic demographics and lot sizes for planned developments—a good indicator of what type of housing will go up there. “Usually the first question a REALTOR® is asked is: ‘what are the schools like?’” “Educate yourself on classroom sizes and teacher/student ratios. Get standardized testing scores for the district you’re in and the surrounding districts. You should be able to get these from your state’s department of education or the local district administrators,” said Maupin. “As REALTORS®, we sign a code of ethics that we are to strive to create better environments. What’s more vital to this than schools? School systems are the hub of society.” Heidi Johnson-Wright frequently writes about Smart Growth and sustainable communities. She and her husband live in a restored historic home in the heart of Miami’s Little Havana. Contact her at: hjohnsonwright@yahoo.com HEALTHY High indoor environmental quality is essential. The significant amount of time that students and teachers spend inside schools during the course of their educational career, combined with children’s increased susceptibility to indoor pollutants underlines the importance of healthy schools. COMFORTABLE Comfort includes thermal, visual and acoustic comfort. ENERGY EFFICIENT Energy efficient schools save money while conserving nonrenewable energy resources and reducing atmospheric emissions. MATERIAL EFFICIENT To the maximum extent possible the school incorporates materials and products that are durable, nontoxic, derived from sustainable yield processes, high in recycled content and easily recycled themselves. WATER EFFICIENT High performance schools are designed to use water efficiently, saving money while reducing the depletion of aquifers and river systems. EASY TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE Building systems are simple and easy to use. Teachers have control over the temperature and lighting in their classrooms, and are trained how to most effectively use them. COMMISSIONING Commissioning is the process of ensuring that building systems are designed, installed, functionally tested, and capable of being operated and maintained according to the schools’ operational needs. Commissioning also can restore existing buildings to high productivity through renovation, upgrade and tune-up of existing systems. Overall, the school should operate the way it was designed to and should meet the needs of the owner. ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIVE SITE To the extent possible, the school’s site conserves existing natural areas and restores damaged ones, minimizes storm water runoff and controls erosion, and enhances the school building’s high performance features. A BUILDING THAT TEACHES By incorporating important concepts such as energy, water, and material efficiency, schools can become tools to illustrate a wide spectrum of scientific, mathematic and social issues. SAFE AND SECURE Students and teachers feel safe anywhere in the building or on the grounds. COMMUNITY RESOURCE The most successful schools have a high level of parent and community involvement. This involvement can be enhanced if schools are designed to be used for neighborhood meetings and other community functions. STIMULATING ARCHITECTURE High performance schools should invoke a sense of pride and be considered a genuine asset for the community. ADAPTABLE TO CHANGING NEEDS High performance schools need to be able to embrace new technologies and respond to demographic and social changes. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 39
Slide 39: School voucher and other school choice programs have induced heavy debates around the nation. There are those that believe the programs are a success while others dispute the actual merits and benefits of the programs. The following two articles were contributed by organizations that hold opposing viewpoints and provide arguments on either side of the issue.* Sides the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®. 40 Choosing School Choice Debate *The opinions expressed in these articles are those of the authors. They do not represent the official policies of the ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 40: A Matter of Choice he last two homes I purchased were well known and sought after for their location. For me, the proximity to work and schools was a natural. But, like an increasing number of parents nationwide, I have opted to choose schools for my kids that are different from those in which my home is zoned. Such choices are more commonplace today, as parents have more opportunity than ever to select a school they think might better serve their children. While it may still be the case that school districts are a top selling point for prospective buyers, REALTORS® are in many places behind the curve. Rather than the school district, they should be selling buyers on proximity to a variety of schools. Research and practice tell us that the best indicator of a successful school district is the presence of a number of educational options for parents. Consider Arizona: Arizona now has 502 charter schools in addition to its 1,754 traditional public schools. Charter schools are independent, public schools that are open by choice and can be run by groups other than traditional school districts. Eight percent of the Grand Canyon State’s students are in charters. In addition, Arizona also offers tax credits to businesses that support scholarship funds for poor or middle-class children to attend private schools. More than 20,000 children now attend private schools in the state. Finally, there is the new virtual school phenomenon. It doesn’t matter where a family lives—a child can log onto the Arizona Virtual Academy and be taught alongside hundreds of other kids, right from home, with teachers fully guiding them along the way. California offers many of the same choices. Cities like Kansas City, Missouri, and Washington, D.C., have nearly 20 percent of their children choosing. And federal law now expands choices to even more parents. Schools that receive federal funds that do not meet certain yearly progress goals are required to offer parents options to attend other public or charter schools, or to make tutoring available in the absence of such options. That law, the No Child Left Behind law, is contributing to the blurring of lines by Jeanne Allen, President, The Center for Education Reform between what we once thought was the sole provider of schooling—the district—and the real delivery mechanism, a school. Education is the last great American institution to feel the pressure from an increasingly technological and ever changing world. But it’s feeling pressure nonetheless. For far too long, America’s schools have been, on average, offering mediocre schooling at best. The standards craze that started in the 1990s and continues today has brought about major consequences for schools that fail to demonstrate proficiency on state standards. This trend is a direct reaction to the decline of our nation’s schools. Similarly and right alongside, school choice became a critical catalyst to push schools and states to improve the offerings they deliver to schools. Today, there are more than 80 privately funded voucher programs operating and a number of tax programs that support choice. The competition that is a mainstay of successful REALTORS® vying for key properties to sell is increasingly a condition to which schools need to respond. This is good for everyone. In communities where there are a number of options in place, competitive environments for schooling have proven to have a positive influence on education outcomes for all schools. Acclaimed Harvard University economist Caroline Hoxby found that in communities where school choice is creating competition, student achievement increased in all kinds of schools. In fact, competition boosted public school test scores as much as eight percent. There’s more to school choice than just competition. Every child is wired differently. Sending children to schools based on where they live may have worked at one time when we had smaller communities, more moms at home and fewer challenges. Today, it’s increasingly common for even the most advantaged child to get lost in a system that is doing education “inside the box” and not focusing on what that child needs the most. Teachers are pulled in dozens of directions and over-regulated. Average kids seem to get lost in even the best pub- T WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 41
Slide 41: Research and practice tell us that the best indicator of a successful school district is the presence of a number of educational options for parents. lic schools, and children with special needs often just tread water. Choice restores order to chaotic systems. It helps focus us on performance and results and puts parents in the driver’s seat. Parents that are happy can stay where they are, and parents who are not content can seek better opportunities for their children without having to pay double. Charter schools allow state and local money to follow children to the charter they’ve designated. Other public school choice efforts also move some percentage of money, depending on the state and community (private school choice options typically only send state funds with kids.) But such programs are not without controversy. The biggest is money. Those coveted property taxes that many of us pay to live where we live often shift with our choices. As a result, school boards have taken to waging political battles over choice. No fewer than 12 states have seen lawsuits over charter schools that started with the state’s school board association. They believe that they and only they should control the local funds and would prefer the money stay in their systems. However, those systems, proponents of charters argue, do not serve all children well. If charter schools, which are public, attract children to those schools, the money that would typically be spent in a school district to educate that child should be sent along with that child. The National Parent Teacher Association (PTA) is also similarly engaged as an opponent. No longer your Mom’s PTA, it has become a defender of the status quo, despite individual parental support of choice that is typically beyond 65 percent. Rather than fight, these changing resources should be a wakeup call to school boards and district leaders to improve what they do and work within the budget constraints they’ve been given. Just as REALTORS® must shift their spending habits when sales shift, so too should school systems be responsive to the needs of kids first. Indeed, there are a handful of school boards nationwide that have embraced charter schools, for example and are using them as a way to reinvigorate their communities. Buffalo, New York is one; San Jose, California, another. The notion of choice will over time require that we overhaul how we finance our schools, so that rather than simply subsidize the schools that have Vouchers Not the Answer Michael Pons, Policy Analyst, National Education Association M illions of dollars, high level passionate and articulate spokespeople, websites, conferences all over the country, and even the bully pulpit have not been enough to engage voters on the issue of private school tuition vouchers. Noted voucher supporters such as researcher Paul E. Peterson and litigator Clint Bolick have characterized vouchers as “the civil rights issue of our time.” What’s missing from this mass movement are the mass and the movement. Previous civil rights issues were not subsidized by elite conservative foundations and largely ignored by the people who would theoretically benefit. Perhaps vouchers don’t answer what people want. Only 44 percent of Americans say they are following news about school vouchers at least somewhat closely, according to an August 2004 Gallup poll. Among those with a strong opinion, only 22 percent say they favor vouchers, while 62 percent report they don’t know enough to say. 42 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 42: always been there, we are subsidizing the schools our children attend. The taxes that homeowners pay for their schools should be able to move with kids to schools they choose. We’re still a long way off from that, but charters and similar efforts are gaining. Whether it is charter schools, scholarships for poor kids, vouchers, tax credits or virtual schooling, the trends are positive for communities and should be embraced by civic leaders such as REALTORS®. As someone who can count at least 10 REALTORS® as close friends, I know that they focus on ensuring that communities deliver a variety of quality services. They have strong reputations and their opinions are valued. But often REALTORS® unwittingly sell families on schools based on long-standing reputations, and not based on fact. “This is a great school district” is a slogan that often applies more to what has been rather than what is. For instance, in Montgomery County, Maryland where I live (a county that is well known by REALTORS® for its continued increases in home values and “great” schools), parents have been fighting for curricula and program changes, having recognized how this once great school system seems to have lost far too many children. The challenge for REALTORS® in this new era of school choice is to understand exactly what’s available to families in their selling area. The educational landscape is rapidly changing around you—and in this new day, choices are quickly becoming the selling point for parents. Jeanne Allen is the president of The Center for Education Reform (CER). CER is a national advocacy and research organization working with states and communities to provide more choices in education and better schools for all children. For more information, contact CER at (202) 822-9000. That same August 2004 Gallup poll found that when given the choice between investing in improving existing public schools and paying for alternatives, such as vouchers, Americans overwhelmingly support investing in public schools—especially when those schools are in their neighborhoods where their children attend. Voucher supporters complain that if Americans were better informed, they would support vouchers more. Says the Hoover Institute’s Terry Moe, “Even though voucher supporters are in the majority, they aren’t well-informed about choice or its possible consequences.” U.S. Deputy Secretary of Education Eugene Hickok says, “We want to change the conversation about parental choice by positively influencing individuals who are resisting parental choice options and get them to reconsider their outlook.” The fact is, the more people know about vouchers, the less likely they are to support them. When voters have been given a choice, they have rejected vouchers by margins of two to one. Recently, Washington, D.C. voters unseated all of the city council members who supported the federal voucher plan. Vouchers rarely come up in open-ended discussions of improving school quality, and they always rank low compared to enhancing teacher quality, reducing class size, or any of a wide range of other school reform ideas. Parents want good schools in their neighborhoods where they can send their children to school for free. They want qualified teachers, safe and orderly schools, small classes, and full access to up-to-date books and materials aligned with high standards and high expectations for every child. No one has been able to convince the majority of Americans that it will bring us closer to achieving these goals if a few students are provided vouchers to find private schooling. Rhetoric Versus Reality Among arguments given for vouchers are that they are supported by the public, will increase student achievement, will enhance accountability, and will save taxpayers money. On those measures, vouchers have failed whereever they have been tried. At present, there are three operating voucher programs—Milwaukee, Cleveland and Florida. Another WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 43
Slide 43: one, the federally funded District of Columbia vouchers is in its first year. The Colorado voucher plan, designed to include 11 school districts, was recently suspended on legal grounds. (The Florida vouchers were also held to be illegal under the Florida constitution, but remain in place pending appeal to the Florida Supreme Court.) Milwaukee is the oldest of the voucher experiments, established in 1985. Since that time, some students who have used vouchers have been lucky enough to get into good private schools, but many have also suffered from educational malpractice in private schools that are worse than the worst public school in the city. For the first time this year, the Wisconsin Legislature took steps to crack down on educational malpractice and financial abuse. Prior to that, the law was so lax, officials were powerless to stop tax dollars from subsidizing “Alex’s Academics of Excellence.” Last year, Alex’s Academics of Excellence was evicted for failure to pay rent even though it received $2.8 million from the state. Florida’s voucher accountability problems are even worse. In Florida, there are two voucher programs—one for students who attend schools rated as failing under the state system and one for students who are eligible for federal assis- The fact is, the more people know about vouchers, the less likely they are to support them. tance as students with disabilities. In addition, there is a tax subsidy for those who contribute to private scholarship programs. Among the most notorious offenders in Florida were the schools run by AJC 2000 Management. According to the St. Petersburg Times, “In their first seven months of operation, the AJC schools have faced allegations of abusing students physically, of providing students with no textbooks or outdated ones, of failing to provide required therapy and counseling and of falsifying applications for state money. Some students have endured seven different teachers in seven months. Some parents are reported to have been paid cash to buy their silence.” Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and the state legislature have repeatedly refused to take steps to provide even minimal oversight to private schools that receive vouchers. Cleveland has done a better job of cracking down on some of the financial abuses. But Cleveland provides the clearest evidence of the underwhelming value of vouchers to improve student achievement. The Indiana University analysis of Cleveland vouchers showed that comparable students did about the same in public or private schools. Moreover, the demand for vouchers was so small in Cleveland that program officials went into the private schools to give vouchers to students who were already attending private schools. Given the limited evidence of student success, obstacles for parents to get their children into good private schools, malfea- 44 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 44: sance and financial abuse, given the fact that the track record for vouchers is dismal, the legal grounds questionable, and support negligible, why do we continue to hear vouchers so much debated and discussed? For one, there is a well-financed, deeply entrenched pro-voucher industry in this country. As long as there is money to be made— and political hay—there will be a voucher “movement.” At the same time, advocating for vouchers is part of a political strategy that is well supported by anti-tax, anti-public service organizations and individuals. Grover Norquist, the conservative strategist famous for saying that the goal of his Americans for Tax Reform is “to get [government] down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub,” also made the definitive statement about the value of vouchers. In remarks before the Heritage Foundation, he said, “Every time you are talking about fixing education through school choice, you are not talking about fixing education by spending more money ...” In a free, representative democracy, people will choose the leaders and policymakers who will give them what they want for their children—high quality public schools in their neighborhood. The National Education Association is working with teachers, education support professionals, parents, community members and elected officials at every level to help make that dream a reality. Why REALTORS® Should Care For those in the real estate business, the voucher battle is more than an intellectual exercise. Americans have long recognized the value of public education in the nation’s economy, as well as the value of education quality in helping sustain and renew healthy communities. What’s more, public schools have a direct relationship to property values. Numerous studies by Donald Jud and James Watts (1981), Kathy Hayes and Lori Taylor (1996), Sandra Black (1999), and others demonstrate how much more residential housing is worth depending on the reputation of the school district. Looking at 3,000 home sales in Charlotte, North Carolina, Jud and Watts found that “holding other home characteristics constant, home values would rise by 5.2 percent” in neighborhoods where third-graders scored a grade level higher in reading on standardized tests. In their review of Dallas home prices, Hayes and Taylor found a 2.6 percent increase in home values relative to a 10 percent increase in math test scores. And Black, looking at Boston housing, found that “parents were willing to spend about 4.2 percent more for a home for a 10 percent increase in 4th grade combined reading and math test scores.” From a real estate perspective, the value of investing in existing public schools—and taking aggressive steps to raise student achievement through proven methods—is of far greater value than vouchers or any other alternative. Michael Pons is a Policy Analyst for the National Education Association (NEA). NEA has a long, proud history as the nation’s leading organization committed to advancing the cause of public education. With its headquarters in Washington, D.C., NEA has 2.7 million members who work at every level of education, from pre-school to university graduate programs. NEA has affiliates in every state, as well as in more than 13,000 local communities across the United States. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 45
Slide 45: live teach where you 46 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 46: Cities and school districts are working together to build affordable housing for teachers. by Christine Jordan Sexton ome teachers in America are learning the cold hard facts of Housing 101: Even though they are deemed “professionals,” their salaries aren’t high enough to guarantee that they will have enough money to buy a home in the town where they work and play. But the lesson may not end there. A growing number of cities and counties are setting up programs that offer housing perks so that teachers can live close to where they work and actually be a member of the community. Teachers in the resort town of Nantucket, Massachusetts, are the latest group of educators who will benefit when units that are owned by the town, and leased to the nonprofit Nantucket Education Trust become available this November. Ten teachers submitted applications for the five units, said Nantucket School Board Facilities Director Jack McFarland. With its 17th century seaside cottages, cooler than average temperatures and history as a whaling center, the island of Nantucket has become the perfect summer getaway, attracting upward of 45,000 people during the height of summer. Real estate prices on the island, which boasts 82 miles of pristine shoreline, have taken off. While the spike in property value has made some people rich, it has left the town of Nantucket struggling with a significant problem, an eroding middle class who can no longer afford to live in there. The units, McFarland said, are being developed to help alleviate what is commonly called the “Nantucket Shuffle.” It happens when teachers—and other lower paid professionals—are forced out of their housing because they can’t afford the high rents that owners charge tourists during the peak season. As a result, some teachers—who initially are hired at salaries that start in the mid-40s—are forced to bunk together to afford the rent. Others just sleep in their cars. McFarland said that teachers can make the 30-mile commute to and from the island, but it is time consuming and expensive. Additionally the long commute increases S Photos contributed by Theresa Hayes from the city of San Jose; Michael Galvin of the Nantucket Chamber of Commerce; Jack McFarland, Facility Manager, for the Nantucket Public School; Beth Higgins from Expressions of Cape Cod; and Robert F. Pyles of the Falmouth Chamber of Commerce. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 47
Slide 47: Teachers … are [being] forced out of their housing because they can’t afford the high rents that owners charge tourists during the peak season. absenteeism and prevents teachers from participating in extra curricula activities. “It’s really a sad thing,” McFarland said. “At last count, 58 teachers and school staff were renters and apt to get lost in the Nantucket Shuffle this year.” Rental demand determines how many of the teachers will have to move out of their homes before the end of the year, he said, noting that teachers were spared from having to move last academic year because the rental demand was lower than usual. “But in some past summers, when demand was high, most had to move before mid June,” McFarland said. “In any event, the vast majority that must move bunk in with friends or other staff who are lucky enough to keep their housing through to the end of that school year. But there have been some tough cases over the past few years. I have heard of several who lived in unfinished basements or unfinished attics; and a few that lived in some of the island merchant’s employee dormitory rooms that had space available at the time.” Five units will be available to Nantucket teachers in November—two, one-bedroom duplexes; two, two-bedroom duplexes and one, two-bedroom bungalow-style home. Two more units will be opened the following January and another three in the spring. In all, the town of Nantucket will have 12 units to rent to teachers this academic year. The homes are being built on lots owned by the town of Nantucket and are being financed by $2.3 million in tax-exempt bonds issued by MassDevelopment, the quasi public state economic development agency charged with economic stimulus in Massachusetts, including providing for affordable housing. The Nantucket homes will be rented belowmarket value, although exact figures were not available. The three smallest rentals must meet the minimum affordability standards outlined by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which also offers affordable housing programs to teachers through the Teacher Next Door program. In the four and a half years since its inception more than 4,000 government properties have been sold said HUD Housing Program Officer Norm Jezzeny. Recruiting teachers to the Nantucket area, where they eventually could be paid upward of $75,000, has become increasingly difficult in a market where the average value listing for 2004 is $1.1 million. The median listing is $800,000. “The fact is there is no way on God’s green earth that a school teacher could afford it,” said Nantucket REALTOR® Ken Beaugrand, who, along with McFarland and a community of others, pursued the housing initiative for five years. Beaugrand, owner of Nantucket Real Estate, said keeping happy the 11,000 locals who live in 48 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 48: the area and work in the service industry is key to keeping tourism revenue pouring in. Maintaining their quality of life and providing their children access to good schools is paramount to that goal, said Beaugrand. Aside from economic reasons Beaugrand also believes that it’s incumbent for Nantucket—or any community—to provide children access to a quality education. “We did something to make sure the educational system was going to be effective,” he said of providing the rental accommodations. The need to provide affordable housing options is apparent. The need to provide affordable housing options is apparent. Even though interest rates are at a historically low level, typical working families are finding it increasingly difficult to afford median priced homes. For instance, a Fannie Mae report released in April 2004 indicates that teachers who are repeat home buyers and who have a 20 percent down payment will have difficulty affording a median priced home. Another finding of the April 2004 report is that among metropolitan areas, only Atlanta, Houston and Philadelphia will remain affordable to median-income home buyers. Another finding shows that the number of “unaffordable markets” is increasing. Indeed, Chicago, Denver, Seattle, and Washington D.C. are the latest areas that have the dubious distinction of being considered unaffordable, joining New York, Los Angeles, Boston and San Francisco. In the Bay area—which has long been considered one of the most expensive regions to live—the Santa Clara Unified School District has taken steps to become the most teacher friendly place in California. The city of San Jose launched a number of initiatives targeted at making housing more affordable for teachers who work in the district. City of San Jose Assistant Housing Director Mike Meyer said the largest initiative is the WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 49
Slide 49: San Jose Teacher Homebuyer Program, which has helped 440 teachers purchase homes since its inception in 1999. The city also has, like Nantucket, built units for teachers to rent at below-market costs. The San Jose Teacher Homebuyer Program allows qualified teachers who are purchasing their first homes to access $40,000 in zero-interest down payment assistance. To date the city has provided nearly $16.6 million in loan assistance which has leveraged just under another $113 million in financing for homes. “From a housing perspective, we feel like this has gone a long way in helping make San Jose distinctive in its efforts to retain and attract highquality teachers,” said Meyer. One of those teachers is San Jose native Joe Black. After college, Black bounced from Japan— where he taught conversational English—to Seattle before eventually returning to the Bay Area. Black, who teaches reading and drivers education at James Lick High School, was the 400th teacher to tap into the program. Additionally, Black got loans from the state of California and the County of Santa Clara which enabled him to buy a two-bedroom, two-bath condominium in the Berryessa, a suburban area of San Jose. While a future of renting wouldn’t have been ideal, Black would have been content so long as he was teaching. But “being able to buy a home is like the icing on the cake. It makes what I do that much more rewarding.” Like Nantucket, San Jose also has units it can rent. The city, which still has some projects under construction, will eventually rent a total of 374 units in four developments. While Nantucket and San Jose have been successful in their efforts to bring affordable housing to teachers, not every town has had similar or positive experiences. Just 50 miles from Nantucket is Falmouth, Massachusetts, in Cape Cod. Falmouth Superintendent Peter Clark doesn’t mince words when describing his efforts in 2002 to have the 50 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 50: Falmouth School Board establish affordable housing options for teachers. “It blew up in my face,” he said, noting that the biggest mistake he made was not initially reaching out to the community and explaining the goal—to provide homes to teachers and other employees who initially earn about $32,000 a year and, therefore, cannot afford to live in the area. “People misunderstand what affordable housing is,” said Clark, who continues to push for the project but this time is working with a broader coalition that includes neighborhood involvement along with involvement of the town of Falmouth and its housing subcommittee. Citing a lack of affordable housing as a stumbling block to teacher recruitment the San Juan Island School Board in Friday Harbor, Washington, announced in 2001 that it would rent two houses it owned to teachers. Preference would be given to teachers in either their first or second year in the field and would be rented at 20 percent below-market value. The school board cancelled the program due to budget reasons, said Lisa Brown, personnel coordinator for the San Juan Island School District. It sold one home and converted the other, she said, to use for its “Parent Partnership Program,” an initiative that allows the San Juan Island School District to partner with parents who choose to home school their children. The partnership enables the district to tap into state education dollars. “It came at a time when there were no teachers living in the homes, and we needed to expand our programs for budget reasons,” said Brown, who added that “retired snow birds” who only want to live in the homes during the hot summer months have been willing to rent to teachers during the school year. “It wasn’t a problem to stop (renting the homes) because we had another option.” Christine Jordan “C.J.” Sexton is a freelance writer based in Tallahassee, Florida. She has written for the Business Journal of South Florida and is a correspondent for Women’s E-News. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 51
Slide 51: town Down schools Photos contributed by Peter Kerze and Bridget Blank of the Cuningham Group Architecture, P .A.; Michael Armado, Marketing Assistant for EHDD Architecture; Charles Todd of Little Architects; Ken Maness, City Planner for Raleigh, NC; and Ethan Kaplan and Peter Aaron of Esto Photographs. 52 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 52: n recent years, downtown districts have been experiencing a comeback hardly imagined a generation ago. Cities of various sizes are scrapping downtown agendas dating from the days when the only attainable goals were adding parking decks, resuscitating ailing department stores and constructing corporate office towers. A bevy of diverse functions are being implemented—specialty shops and galleries, farmers’ markets, civic buildings, streetscape enhancements, even mass transit and housing, are coming to life again. One such function is the downtown public school, once a casualty of the wrecking ball in the days of urban renewal. This new generation of public schools is dubbed by a host of enthusiastic observers as a “new-building type”, characterized by an integrated, even global mix of students, creative and discerning architectural forms, updated curricula, and partnerships with community institutions and services. What follows are capsule descriptions of three successful ventures: San Francisco, Minneapolis and Raleigh, North Carolina. Each school project demonstrates how creativity, vision and long-term commitment can overcome the status quo. SAN FRANCISCO—TENDERLOIN COMMUNITY SCHOOL— URBAN MELTING POT In the fall of 1990, a meeting was held between the Bay Area Women’s and Children’s Center (BAWCC) and Superintendent Cortines of the San Francisco Unified I r r b a n Fr o nti e Th e N ew U by Martin Zimmerman School district, to discuss the results of an exhaustive two-year resident survey of Tenderloin, the name given to a downtown district, long reputed to be one of the toughest sections of San Francisco. Tenderloin, so-named in the days when cops and graft coexisted and prime steak was a job benefit, encompasses 56 high-density blocks just north of San Francisco’s City Hall and civic center. Their findings confirmed a radical shift in the demographic makeup of Tenderloin. Numerous rooming houses, formerly a safe haven for the disenfranchised, were now bursting at the seams with families from China, Laos, Cambodia and the South Pacific islands. As many as 200 children lived in tight quarters on some blocks, and the swelling population was inching upwards towards the 30,000 mark. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 53
Slide 53: Armed to the teeth with data, and with the backing of businesses and nonprofits, BAWCC made its case, but failed to garner the school district’s support. There was no choice except to embark on a citywide campaign to win favor from those who held the purse. It took another eight years before the goal of final build-out could be achieved. At last in the fall of 1998 the K–5 Tenderloin Community School officially opened its doors to serve a global student population mixing the newcomers with Latino/Hispanics, African-Americans and Caucasians. The respected Bay Area architectural firm EHHD adapted the complex program requirements to a tight 1.3 acre site along Turk Street. These requirements placed high priority on incorporating badly needed community resources within the school. For parents and students, there is a library with books in many languages, a multipurpose room available for rental, ESL classes and even a rooftop community garden. There are three playgrounds, two at ground level for preschool and grades 1–2 and one rooftop for grades 3–6. Located below grade is the Esherick Center, named after deceased architect Joe Esherick of EHHD, which includes the Computer Center, Health Center with dental and mental health service areas and the Adult Education Center. According to Midge Wilson, director of BAWCC and a key player from the outset, there is even a handbook available in three languages explaining the various services available at Tenderloin Community School for students and families. The design, both inside and out, shines as a bright sunburst of reds and yellows, and signals the school’s presence as a refuge amidst a hustle, bustle district thought to be second only to Chinatown in density. The front façade and interiors are adorned with murals composed of 5,000 glazed tiles, a collaborative effort between school children and artist Martha Heavenston. Now in its seventh year of operation, Tenderloin Community School (TCS) has also solidified a base of downtown affiliations to augment its curriculum. These range from the Philip Burton Federal building to the San Francisco Ballet. With characteristic modesty, Ms. Wilson can now say that, “TCS has achieved its mission of educating, supporting and celebrating the entire community in all of its diversity.” In recent years, downtown districts have been experiencing a comeback hardly imagined a generation ago … one such function is the downtown public school. 54 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 54: Tenderloin Community School has achieved its mission of educating, supporting and celebrating the entire community in all of its diversity. MINNEAPOLIS—THE INTERDISTRICT DOWNTOWN SCHOOL— DESEGREGATION Sometimes it takes a court order to build a school. The genesis of the Interdistrict Downtown School (IDDS) dates back to the 1970s, longer than Tenderloin, and at a time when few could imagine a school for downtown Minneapolis. But when the city of Minneapolis was placed under court order to desegregate its schools, something had to be done. Nevertheless, it took until 1989 to establish a working partnership between the city school system and its nine suburbs to resolve the desegregation issue. The outcome was an agreement to build three new magnet schools in order to comply with the courts. It was also agreed that the first of these schools was to be in downtown Minneapolis. It took until 1993 to obtain an appropriation of $10 million from the state of Minnesota to cover construction costs. With a decision-making structure established between all 10 school districts to guide the programming and design, the requisite committees were convened and architectural consultants were hired. All planning was to be held in check by a twin mantra: 1) devise an innovative 21st century curriculum capable of engaging the downtown community; and 2) assure that the facility is cost-effective. The outcome proved to be a remarkable combination of variables involving many additional partners. Two with the most direct impact turned out to be the University of St. Thomas, which was interested in moving its School of Education facility from St. Paul to its downtown Minneapolis campus, and the city’s interest in providing additional parking to serve the entertainment/theatre district. Today both educational institutions share air rights on top of an underground parking deck financed and built by the Minneapolis Community Development Authority and just up Hennepin Avenue from several theatre marquees. Thus the twin mantra was achieved. IDDS could link its curriculum to a host of arts and science institutions throughout downtown via Minneapolis simply by walking through an interconnected system of overhead, pedestrian walkways, and no land needed had to be taken off the tax rolls. Construction costs were minimized by omitting uses which already existed in the downtown. IDDS has no gymnasium or performing arts space, and relies on the YMCA, a nearby theater, the Minneapolis Public Library and even a private WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 55
Slide 55: It took years of work, unprecedented cooperation across district lines, inventive curriculum planning and innovative architectural design, to forge such a successful outcome. bookstore to serve these needs. In the end, IDDS would cost no more to build and operate than suburban schools. In 1998 the four story K–12 magnet school finally opened, the first in downtown Minneapolis in 70 years. Cuningham Group architects have crafted an innovative design of bold and dynamic forms. Incorporating these with many sustainable design options, such as the downtown’s first active solar wall installation, have further enhanced the school’s reputation. It took years of work, unprecedented cooperation across district lines, inventive curriculum planning and innovative architectural design, to forge such a successful outcome. RALEIGH—MOORE SQUARE MUSEUMS MAGNET SCHOOL—CULTURAL PARTNERSHIP Raleigh, the capital city of North Carolina, may not be as big as Minneapolis or San Francisco, but it is a community with a mission. With the completion of Moore Square Museum Magnet School (M2M3) in 2002, the long-standing mission to strengthen the downtown core and make close-in neighborhoods attractive and affordable took a big step forward. Moore Square is just a few blocks from the state capitol building and a host of downtown museums and performance facilities such as the North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, the Exploris/IMAX facility, Raleigh City Museum, the Contemporary Art Museum and Pope House Museum. This proximity is central to a prime educational objective of Moore Square Magnet School. Cathy Bradley, its first principal, has noted that “because our campus is located in the heart of downtown Raleigh, we are ideally situated to realize our goals—joining with museums and cultural organizations to enhance learning.” Moore school’s prominent corner tower faces its namesake square, which is one of five urban squares dating back to Raleigh’s founding in 1792. It serves as a beacon to welcome students and guests from throughout the Wake County system into its dynamic three-story ceremonial room 56 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 56: Quality public schools are being recognized as important agents … for downtowns to continue attracting residents and jobs. and gallery space. As a magnet school its students are selected by lottery from throughout the system, with a twenty percent set-aside for students of color. Moore school also acts to anchor and blend with the scale of the adjoining neighborhood where downtown planners are encouraging affordable in-fill housing. According to architect Charles Todd of Little Associates architects, a great deal of remedial work was required prior to actual construction once it was confirmed as a brownfield site. In the process, remains of a former prison, a gas station and auto repair shop and rubber factory had to be contended with, and contaminated soil removal to depths as great as 30 feet was required. And like its sister schools in Minneapolis and San Francisco, lawns and large playing fields that are taken for granted on twenty-acre suburban sites had to be reduced to fit an urban city block of four-acres. As one of the curriculum planners points out wryly, “We weren’t sure at the time if the primary recreation activity was to be running in place or tiddlywinks.” Eventually, it was decided that a gym, the science labs and the cafeteria were essential, but extracurricular team sports could be sacrificed. The student body was also reduced from 1000 to 600 allowing two playing fields, surface parking and bus drop-off to be located inconspicuously behind the school. Last year, M2M3’s success on all of these fronts brought national recognition in the form of an EPA Smart Growth Award. WILL THIS TREND CONTINUE? Only time can tell. But a new awareness seems to be emerging as greater downtown emphasis is placed on the cross-fertilization of racial and ethnic diversity, culture and education. Quality public schools are being recognized as important agents not only for downtowns to continue attracting residents and jobs, but equally important: the provision of as broad a range of urban choice and amenity as possible. Martin Zimmerman is an urban affairs writer, architect and city planner currently based in Charlotte N.C. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 57
Slide 57: smartGrowth Compiled by Gerald L. Allen, NAR Government Affairs in the states CALIFORNIA To maximize the economic and environmental advantages of California’s $14 billion investment in bus and rail systems over the last decade, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill that will facilitate the construction of mixed-use “transit villages” within a radius of onethird of a mile of bus, rail or ferry stations. The bill will let counties and municipalities proceed with their transit-oriented development plans if they demonstrate five, rather than 13, public benefits of transit village projects. The list of benefits may include relief of traffic congestion, improved air quality, redevelopment of depressed neighborhoods or marginal areas, and better use of present infrastructure. ALABAMA The Saving Towns at Risk program (STAR) was launched in March of 2004 to fight urban decay and to revitalize downtowns throughout the state. The STAR program is a cooperative effort between the Urban Affairs & New Nontraditional Programs unit of the Alabama Cooperative Extension System (ACES) and the Alabama Mayors’ Corporation for Economic, Cultural and Educational Development. The ACES has offices in every county in Alabama, and the Mayors’ Corporation represents 49 towns and cities with nearly 400,000 residents. The STAR program team is charged with developing ways to spur public dialogue and with forging diverse coalitions to create infrastructure and town revitalization projects. ARKANSAS In Fayetteville, local developers, city officials, lenders and attorneys are considering the creation of a tax increment financing (TIF) district to help finance the redevelopment of properties in the downtown area. The city is adamant that creation of the TIF district would not mean that tax rates will increase or that there will be new taxes assessed. Rather, the TIF project would be financed in part by utilizing the incremental tax revenues that result from the improvements to projects approved by the city council in the TIF redevelopment district. DELAWARE A new procedure, the PLUS Process, allows developers and state planning and transportation officials to address potential project problems before formal plans are submitted. A Rehoboth Beach developer availed himself of the procedure to discuss a proposed dense “rural village” on 842 acres north of Milton, Sussex County, with state officials. His plan consultant, national Smart Growth expert Randall Arendt, explained that the possible 1,672 variedstyle homes, including units for seniors, would be built in clusters around a central green to maximize open space and save a tract of forest. Named Isaac’s Glen, the village would feature a town hall, an 18-hole golf course, an artificial river, and perhaps some commercial space along the intersecting state highway. The project would require rezoning the area for higher residential density. HAWAII A 14-year plan is in place to ease road congestion in the Honolulu area with a 25-mile Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line between Kapolei west of the city and the University of Hawaii in the Manoa neighborhood, southeast of the city. Site preparation has begun for six stations along the BRT line’s initial 5.6mile downtown-waterside segment through Kakaako to Waikiki. Spending $31 million from its own budget on the initial segment, Honolulu just received authorization by an Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization oversight committee to seek $20 million in federal money. The BRT system will use hybrid gas-electric buses, which will reduce air pollution even further over automobile travel. ILLINOIS The City of Chicago has adopted a new zoning ordinance, effective November 1, 2004, that is designed to promote new urbanist principles, such as pedestrian-oriented streetscapes. It is the first overhaul of the city’s zoning rules since 1957, and although it follows a conventional ordinance structure, is considered to be an innovative “smart code.” The American Planning Association’s June 2004 Zoning Practice report on formbased zoning lists the city as one of the few municipalities to adopt this new approach to zoning. 58 ON COMMON GROUND WINTER 2005
Slide 58: KANSAS “Visioneering Wichita” is embarking on a citizen-driven process to identify the future the region wants and then build that future through citizen participation. Visioneering Wichita involves creating dialogue between interested citizens and organizations that have common interests and goals. It is a vision-driven strategic planning process that will produce a shared vision of what the Wichita area wants to be. The process will involve hundreds of residents in creating the shared vision and provides a framework for collaboration that will make the Wichita regional community a reality. The founding vision partners are the City of Wichita government, the Sedgwick County government, the Wichita Community Foundation, the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation and the Wichita Area Chamber of Commerce. The Vision Final Plan is scheduled for completion in December of 2004. KENTUCKY In 2000, in response to the Kentucky Department of Transportation’s decision to complete a five-lane road that would require the relocation of the heart of Union, the town adopted a Town Plan that included a blueprint for a new town center. City officials feared that in the absence of planning that the city would lose its way of life, with an influx of strip centers and big box retail. According to city officials and planners, the plan, which includes strict standards on issues such as architectural design, is off to a good start. A developer of a large residential project agrees, saying that “[t]heir plan was well thought out. That made it easy to work with them.” MARYLAND Maryland has received 22 applications from developers and communities across the state looking to take advantage of Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.’s new Priority Places anti-sprawl program, which promises state help with building projects in already developed areas. The projects stretch from Frostburg in Western Maryland to Caroline County on the Eastern Shore, with two in Baltimore and one in Annapolis. Sixteen came from city or town governments, four from private developers, and one each from a nonprofit group and a county. Building projects and community revitalization plans selected under the new program would be offered the coordinated technical help of all state agencies, given “fast-track” regulatory reviews and be put first in line for any state grants that are available, though officials acknowledge that because of the state’s current fiscal crisis, the program has no dedicated funding. Officials have indicated they might pick up to a halfdozen projects, though the decision depends on the quality of the applications. A decision on the projects is expected in December of 2004. MASSACHUSETTS The state has recognized three towns for its “Smart Growth” initiatives. A June survey conducted by the state’s Vision 2020 program found Abington, Marion, and Brockton to be the only towns among 51 communities in southeastern Massachusetts to adhere to Smart-Growth principles, which are intended to reduce development sprawl. According to Town Planner Daniel Crane, Abington was cited for its recent establishment of a master plan and its efforts to change zoning bylaws to allow more intensive development of its business zones. “We’re very much proud of what we have been able to achieve,” said Crane. NEVADA The Clark County Community Growth Task Force will present its proposals for curbing sprawl, road congestion and air pollution in January 2005. The task force’s proposals focus on alternatives to leapfrog development toward the valley desert fringes in the Las Vegas area as its first priority and on affordable housing as the second. Task force member and university history professor Hal Rothman stressed, “Infill is the place to begin to find a solution.” County officials believe that with land prices increasingly high, developers would take advantage of possible county incentives for “mixed-use communities” or urban villages, which would help reduce car dependency, traffic jams, air pollution and housing costs. As part of the solution, the county should also build a light-rail system, said Regional Transportation Commission General Manager Jacob Snow. VIRGINIA The Fairfax County Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of a plan for mixed-use development surrounding the Vienna Metro station. The development would replace a 56-acre suburban enclave of single-family homes with two office buildings of roughly 12 stories, some shops and roughly 2,200 apartments, condominiums and townhouses. The project marks the first steps of Fairfax County to mirror other localities in the region by clustering development around stops on the Metro system. The plan is opposed by some in the neighborhood, who feel that it would create problems in its immediate vicinity, straining roads and schools as well as setting a precedent that would lead to the loss of the remaining leafy single-family neighborhoods in the area. WINTER 2005 ON COMMON GROUND 59