I attended the event arranged by the facilities planning team assisting Minneapolis Public Schools (MPS) in the development of scenarios for future building use this evening at Green Central Park School from 6:30 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
There were about as many parents and citizens in attendance as there were paid consultants. All of the consultants that I spoke to seemed like very professional people who are capable and competent; I didn't get to visit with all of them. Both groups, the facilities planning team and the Community Engagement Process folks, appeared to have their whole teams present. The answer given to the question asked as to how the district could afford to hire all the assembled consultants was something along the lines of 'well, the district wasn't able to do it with existing staff.' It was clear to me that the facilities planning team's mission was to come up with the list of schools that the district could close with as little uproar as possible. They said they were seeking input, but the only input they wanted was a prioritization of the generally unintelligible criteria that they had already listed on the posters surrounding the room - there were spaces for write-in comments. The question and comment period for non-consultants was limited to about twenty minutes, and that grudgingly. Closing schools seems to be a foregone conclusion, no matter what the Community Engagement Process actually eventually reveals. The Community Engagement Process folks are real nice. They're going to get input from all of the people who don't normally give input on such things between now and the first part of October and then synthesize that input so that the board can make a decision based on that input in early November, and they assured us that they have no preconceived plan in mind. In the private conversations I had with about a half dozen of the consultants, I asked each of them if they thought the announced time table was realistic. Here is a sampling of the responses: "We intend to do the very best we can", punctuated with a well polished smile; "yeah, right" along with a roll of the eyes; "You'd have to take that up with __________ over there, they're handling the timing piece;" and my favorite, "No shit, buddy, twelve to eighteen months might get the job done." To which I responded, "you can be glad I'm not the one signing your checks." When I challenged one the consultants about the validity of a decision process that moves at this pace the response was, "Well, if we don't get those schools closed in time for school choice for next year, even more teachers will need to be laid off." That was immediately after he admitted that the connection between laying off teachers and closing schools had yet to be substantiated and justified. The general impression I got was that the facilities department wants to simplify its workload and they would let the parents and teachers know what would be best. The Pratt analysis was not mentioned - they weren't doing specific schools or programs tonight. That will come at some later date. Dan McGuire Ericsson 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
