As someone contributing to the fiscal analysis, I appreciate Steve Cross' enthusiasm but am a bit more circumspect myself. As noted, we have done our best to try to get from the MPS the data necessary to do a careful analysis, but the comprehensive and current data have not been at hand and we have been forced to make the most sound assumptions that we can. Also, we who have done the analysis are not trained in the fiscal analysis of K-5 schools. So while at this point we have done the most responsible analysis we can, my view is that what the analysis primarily accomplishes is to force the MPS, if it is in good faith, to engage its knowledgeable staff in a serious review of Pratt's fiscal viability. Perhaps our analysis will be found to be deeply flawed. Or perhaps it will stand up to scrutiny, in which case it will help the MPS move away from the easy position that "schools of fewer than 400 students are not viable" and offer hope for creative small-school models within the MPS and elsewhere (the Pratt concept rests on close integration with a "sister" school and with community education, both of which bring fiscal advantages, and the walkability of this neighborhood school also can result in tremendous transportation cost savings).
In short, I was surprised, when the analysis was completed, at the apparent positive results, but objective peer review awaits. If our analysis stands, I certainly would hope that the MPS would be willing and indeed eager to support Pratt despite its earlier, perhaps hasty pronouncement that Pratt is not financially viable and therefore must be closed. Chuck Holtman Prospect Park Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 21:29:05 -0500 From: "Steve Cross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Mpls] Pratt School Position Papers To: "Minneapolis Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" All: At the PPERRIA meeting tonight, the position papers on Pratt School were unanimously approved. There are two papers. One is on the policy of keeping Pratt open. That one I previously posted on this forum. There is a second one on the financial viability of keeping Pratt open. You can read both at the PPERRIA website of http://www.pperr.org/ and also in Word format on the Save Pratt website of http://44clarence.com/pratt/. While both papers are of interest, people from all sections of the city may be particularly interested in the fiscal analysis. The basic conclusion is that Pratt is operated at a profit to the school system and that, if Pratt should be shut down, the school system will incur additional costs that will mean a net loss. It's my understanding that the financial analysis was done, with great difficulty, by pulling information piece by piece out of the school district. And the conclusion is directly contrary to the basic assertion last year that Pratt must be closed in order to save money. Other areas of the city may be interested not only in the conclusions reached in the papers but in their methodology as well. Just so no one gets any impression that because I'm posting this information here that I am, somehow, also responsible for the work done on the papers, I need to say that I wish that it were only so. There was an enormous amount of work done by the Save Pratt committee but I was NOT a member. But the Save Pratt people who did do the work deserve great credit for the public service they have performed. Some of the people who did the work are listed on the Save Pratt website. Steve Cross Prospect Park REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
