Next Steps For DeKalb Schools
School district administration will develop a cost loaded schedule over the next several months and bond financing to accelerate key projects within the program.
February 2017 – The Board will be asked to adopt a Bond Resolution at its February 2017 Board meeting and approximately $130 million will be made available to accelerate the program.
March 2017 – At the March 2017 Board meeting, staff will present a program schedule to include a full list of projects, budgets, and anticipated start and finish dates.
Staff will immediately begin its procurement process to hire professional design firms to initiate the formal design process for major construction projects. Recommended configuration of classrooms and core space additions will be addressed by the architects and the local schools will have input via its construction committee (appointed by the School Council or charter governing board).
July 2017 – Sales tax revenue collections start for the new E-SPLOST V on July 1.
1. Issuance of Request for Proposals for Program Management Services: December 2016 – Complete
2. Develop cost-loaded schedule and cash flow in support of the Board-approved project list and bond financ-ing: December 2016 – February 2017
3. Issuance of RFPs for new Cross Keys HS and major additions of middle and high schools: January 2017
4. Board adopts Bond Resolution for $140 million issuance: February Board meeting (estimated Feb. 6, 2017)
5. Announcement of timing and selection of construction committees for the new Cross Keys HS and major additions of middle and high schools: February 2017
6. Bond funds ($140 million) available to the District: February/March 2017
7. Board approval of E-SPLOST project budgets and anticipated start and finish dates: March Board meeting (estimated March 6, 2017)
8. Sales tax revenues collections start for new E-SPLOST: July 1, 2017
“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.”
Great, the same school councils (and that charter) will now decide even more for us? What a disaster. Dunwoody homeowners can easily point blame to a handful of people. This is what happens when those who won’t can’t get elected to public office get some power.
Dunwoody homeowners can easily point blame to a handful of people
Blame for what? Do you think people aren’t going to buy homes because the HS and MS will be larger?
I would also add that a really good next step is to completely overhaul the methodology for school council input vis a vis Parent Council United (PCU). I feel that grass roots organization needs to go by the wayside, and quickly! There needs to be some other more equitable and transparent school representation feedback methodology to County administration put into place so that EVERY.SINGLE.SCHOOL has an opportunity for input into such important decisions and processes. Here are a couple of links I found with more info about PCU….no meeting agendas, minutes, etc. that I could find. They also have a Facebook page.
http://www.dekalbschoolsga.org/parent-council-united/
http://www.pcudekalb.org/
PCU is an independent organization with no more authority than the Survey Says Council United.
School Councils – Georgia’s A+ Education Reform Act of 2000, O.C.G.A. § 20-2-85–86, required that school councils be established at every public school. School councils are policy-level advisory bodies to the Principal, Superintendent, and Board of Education. They may advise and make recommendations on any matter related to school improvement and student achievement. The purpose of school councils is to “bring communities and schools closer together in a spirit of cooperation to solve difficult education problems, improve academic achievement, provide support for teachers and administrators, and bring parents into the school-based decision-making process.”
Stan, is there a mechanism in place for official school council members and DCSD administrators to formally share feedback on important County related education initiatives?
I was unable to determine from the the PCU listing on the DCSD website that they were independent from the County. I suppose it could be interpreted that way from the “grass roots” verbiage.
Survey Says: ” there a mechanism in place for official school council members and DCSD administrators to formally share feedback on important County related education initiatives?”
Yes. Dr. Green is implementing a new process, introduced at a fairly-well attended meeting on 10/27 at the Central Office. It was to officially announce the roll-out of just such a process. Kina Champion is the School Governance Liaison. A “Vision for Stakeholder Engagement” & a very specific focus on the “Purpose & Direction of School Councils” were the two segments of her presentation. This is expected to be rolled out by the end of the school year. Already you should be able to find School Council info. uniformly listed on each school’s website under “About Us.” This is one of the small first steps being put into place – when complete all will have members, contact info. bylaws, agendas & minutes. If you check, various school are at different stages of getting it done.
But more importantly there is being put into place expectations of engagement not only with the central office, but between the various councils, both within each cluster & region-wide. There is more detail somewhere, I got it at the meeting, I bet it’s on the website somewhere.
Here you go:
http://www.dekalbschoolsga.org/documents/school-councils/school-council-chair-reception-dr-green-vision.pdf
Thanks Bill, very helpful info and I’m glad to hear this initiative is being put into place!
When my children were in school, there was a very robust Chamblee-Dunwoody Parent Council. Speakers from the District level were involved in the monthly programs on a consistent basis. While some attendees may not have agreed with many of the programs or the information presented the council was able to hear from some of the district employees. There was also an annual appearance by the Superintendent (whoever that was) which allowed for feedback. I’m not sure what happened to DCPC. Did it get phased out? I believe the Emory/Lavista Parent Council was quite involved as well.
Anyway, I’m glad to see the councils are important to Dr. Green.
I don’t think I have received anything from DCPC in the last year. People running DCPC started spending all their time on GLASS.
Paula – DCPC kind of faded out due to lack of participation and focus; there’s a group starting to reconstitute to replace it with representation from the Dunwoody, Chamblee, and Cross Keys clusters called ‘Peachtree Gateway Parent Council’, I think the intent is that it stay more focused on coordinating dialogue and information sharing between the various parent councils within that area, and with the PCU group.
They’re at the stage of drafting by-laws and setting their organzation up, but they’ve still got work to do on it,
Well, the disaster has struck – Option B was approved despite a loud majority of citizens in our area wanting to defer the vote. I suppose that three out of the four high schools, CMS, Montgomery, Austin, Sagamore, Oak Grove, and others were basically told to go to hell.
To that end MES its time to ensure that our children will have a adequate place to go to school up through 8th grade before they have to go to a high school in an original building and property built for 1600 that will take on 2400 when everything is said and done.
So what might be the future for MES?
The signs inevitably point to some type of redistricting or an opening up of Nancy Creek Elementary School as a resident school (currently KMS).
Here is what I see potentially occurring.
– Redistricting: MES is clearly too large right now and this will likely only increase (unless people are so afraid of the high school that they move now – the talk on that is deafening – THANKS DEKALB!). But let’s assume that people decide to work through this and the population will increase. Otherwise all this is moot. Ok, so John Lewis will likely alleviate some members of APES freeing up spots for MES kids. That means at a minimum those on the southern end of the current MES district (South of Silver Lake) will likely go into APES. In fact, depending on where the line is drawn, this could go to Silver Lake itself or rise all the way up to Johnson Ferry Road. Of course, the implications here are huge as those folks will change clusters now vs. just elementary schools. Of course, the eastern/Chamblee side of the MES area could also move to Huntley Hills and remain in the same high school cluster. That being said, I believe that Cross Keys will be renamed Brookhaven High School and that they will attempt to put as much of “Brookhaven” as possible into the new cluster. So, in my mind, they will likely grab up to Silver Lake and possibly Johnson Ferry as part of APES.
– Returning of KMS to an elementary school: In this case, Nancy Creek reopens as a neighborhood elementary school (are we allowed to say neighborhood schools anymore in Dekalb County?) and takes with it, the traditional Nancy Creek neighborhoods which would include the east side of Murphy Candler and all of the Chamblee side of MES. Of course, that traditionally went down into the eastern part of Chamblee (east of Peachtree) down almost to Buford Highway. That would likely happen here. MES retains roughly the western part of Brookhaven down to Windsor Parkway and over the county line and north up to 285. Conceivably some homes/neighborhoods south of Windsor to Peachtree that are currently at APES also may be included here.
– Nancy Creek becomes Montgomery East (housing 4th and 5th grades): This has been a popular discussion point for many MES families in order to “keep our school together.” In theory it makes a ton of sense as the schools are barely a mile from one another. It enables everyone to stay under the MES brand with its already strong foundation and infrastructure. Will Dekalb go for a non traditional model? I seriously doubt it, but given how MES has been screwed over with Option B, maybe the school board will listen to parents who it threw under the bus with the SPLOST vote. Almost like a “we owe you one.”
I don’t see much changing with CMS beyond the loss of APES.
Regardless, MES parents need to get over this setback and work to develop the best K-5th and 6-8th school for their kids. Then worry about the high school mess. This is the neighborhood school that is in our backyard and we should have some say over it. And please, please, please do not let outsiders like Kim Gokce or Rebekah Cohen Morris or Bill Armstrong or Scott Gillespie any where near this decision. This one is ours.
Stan,
I take objection to your statement that the people running DCPC started spending all their time on GLASS. Last year, DCPC spent no time on political advocacy; instead we focused on efforts such as guiding parents through the special education / IEP process, protecting students from online predators, and providing a forum for elected officals such as yourself to provide updates.
DCPC leadership consisted of a group of people, some of which were associated with GLASS, and even more that were not. To broadly paint the group with that brush does all of them a disservice.
Who’s in DCPC leadership? I was just aware of you and Allegra.
MES Parent. Can’t redustrict to HHES they are overcrowded as well. Can’t moved kids from one school only to move them to trailers at another.
Highly doubt there will be a shift to APES either. The kids moved to JLE: will alleviate some overcrowding but it will still be at capacity.
Only think I see happening is Nancy creek reopening. This I am ok with this, As opposed to your other suggestions. I would like to see Nancy creek become a 3-5 school in order to keep the. Community together!!!!
We just need to dig in!!!
Kittredge/Nancy Creek has 480 enrolled. Is there enough 4th/5th graders to fill that? Where do you propose the 4-6th magnet go? Didnt many families relocate to the Montgomery area because of the appeal of having the magnet nearby? Would parents with multiple grade children want 2 drop offs at schools that begin at 7:45?
Paula
Dunwoody High would be better with 1500 instead of 2200
Jeff – People are relocating to Montgomery because it is a strong school with a strong community. As for the magnet, I really would like to blow it up and replace it with something better because it is a divisive, unfair system that results in the county picking winners and losers and a lot of qualifying kids being left out in the cold. But no one wants to talk about that.
MES Parent: You are right that in many ways the CMS/CCHS magnet has gotten in the way of the discussion; that was pretty clearly a significant constraint placed on the planning department, along with ‘no split feeders’, from the community feedback. And the current value of the magnet in its original purpose of school integration is certainly questionable. (The Kittredge magnet is a different discussion, of course)
Unfortunately, this is exactly the wrong time to consider the magnet; if the Montgomery parent leadership (which is heavily interlocked with CMS/CCHS parent leadership right now; the minimal representation from APES and HHES is an issue) had been willing to consider that 4-6 months ago, there might have been some other options on the table. From their comments, there was a failure by them to get in the dialogue with the planning department, however; honestly, it’s a mystery to me why our experience (in HH) in the planning process was so radically different from the Montgomery one. I hope it’s not as simple as us saying “Thanks for your good work and support” at the bottom of our e-mails. Partnering across lines with folks from Northwoods in Doraville certainly helped us provide better feedback.
Maybe we revisit the magnet status when it’s time for the redistricting discussion; but right now, the focus of all of the parent school leadership has to be doing the best job possible of spending the budget, and getting the best design possible on these expansions – and we need to make sure that all area schools are at the table for that discussion, so there are no hard feelings. Out of the strategy phase, on to tactical…
Scott,
I don’t think it is fair to say people were not willing to consider moving the magnet. As a magnet parent (by way of MES) I have always been open to it. The problem was DCSD planners would never answer the question of where would it move to. I can’t imagine anyone supporting the idea of moving it to SW DeKalb where a magnet program already exists. Like many questions that were asked the answer was always, ‘don’t worry about the details, we’ll figure that out later’. Obviously the details are extremely important. I truly believe that if DCSD either had or shared more info at Community Input sessions a lot of this mess would have been avoided. My two cents.
Back in July the administration presented Option 2B relocating 650 magnet students from Chamblee Charter HS to SW DeKalb HS. I don’t think that went over so well, so it was later reworded to be “Relocate magnet programs to school(s) with available capacity”.
I would have liked to have seen the conceptual plans back in July when they were put together.
In September, DHS school council came out with their position recommending Option B. They were confident Option B would address their need for an art wing, choral room and a number of other renovations which Nancy and I guaranteed them there was no way the board or administration would put into the plans.
In July/August I had seen glimpses of the conceptual plans for the building additions at Peachtree Charter MS. It didn’t occur to me until shortly after DHS presented their position that there might be conceptual plans for the other building additions. On Oct 12 I requested any drawings and maps they had for all the building additions to no avail. I requested them every week until the school administration finally published them in early November.
DHS school council asked for a deferral of the vote after the conceptual plans came out, but the train had left the station by then.
The entire thing was a scam from the get go. These lapdogs like Bill Armstrong and Gillespie who praised the county board for its transparency and parent input? What a load of crap! They had their plan the entire time. It was option B. It is proven by the drawings. It is proven by the way they tried to engineer the vote by splitting the Option A vote into keep the magnet and get rid of the magnet. You notice there wasn’t that for Option B, right? Its because they WANTED the vote to go for Option B. These folks praising Green as being different? Give me a break! He’s the same creature as Lewis, Pope, Atkinson, etc. This is slimy as hell. Bring on school vouchers so we can hit them where it counts. I would LOVE to for my taxes to follow my kids when they go to private school next year. Dekalb county shouldn’t get one red cent from my household. They have failed my family miserably.
MES Parent: “Nancy Creek becomes Montgomery East (housing 4th and 5th grades): This has been a popular discussion point for many MES families in order to “keep our school together.” In theory it makes a ton of sense as the schools are barely a mile from one another.”
Good idea. I always thought that before DES was built that they should have taken the old CMS property & turn it into “Vanderlyn South.” The key would be keeping the name, as you propose, because just having a school that nearby alone wouldn’t prevent a battle on where the line is drawn. You might find some would prefer trailers than change schools to one with the “wrong” name. They could have done the same w/DES but didn’t. Although based on that line drawing battle, not sure that would have helped. But your idea of doing it by grade? maybe a better solution – easier to sell.
Although you might want to check with some of your fellow parents at MES before pushing to move Kittredge too far, or do away with it altogether. I’m pretty certain that MES has more students at Kittredge than any other school in the county, and I bet they tend to be children of more-active parents, who enjoy having the Magnet that nearby (maybe have younger siblings still at MES ready for the lottery), especially with CMS & CCHS just around the corner too.
And by way of transparency – I have one child at CMS who went thru Kittredge, another who is a CCHS resident & my youngest at HH not yet qualified for the lottery. But whether she does qualify or not, gets in or not, we’ll be moving on to CMS & CCHS. Not threat of going private over here in the Armstrong house.
“And please, please, please do not let outsiders like Kim Gokce or Rebekah Cohen Morris or Bill Armstrong or Scott Gillespie any where near this decision. This one is ours.” Trust me, not a goal of mine. I share your desire for neighborhood schools. My fondest school memory at HH was the one year when I had one in 5th, 3rd & PK – and they could see each other’s classroom door from their own, and we could walk up to school together.
Q: When Nancy Creek was split, who had a hand in drawing those lines? I know nobody at Huntley Hills did. Maybe Crawford Lewis did it all by himself. But we at Huntley Hills aren’t complaining, we LOVE the kids we absorbed, our position paper the last time around was simply – “please do not move those children again, keep them in Huntley Hills.” Drake told me “don’t worry – nobody else is asking for them.” Their loss.
As you mentioned, Dunwoody elementary was built right down the street from Vanderlyn. DES was a 4th/5th grade academy for Vanderlyn. It was a disaster and DES was later changed to K-5.
Defeatedparent “Lapdogs.” I know Lewis & the rest wouldn’t have called anyone from Huntley Hills lapdogs. Why the change for so many of us this time? We observe closely, we listen, we engage. And we see Green differently. We see our Regional Super Sherry Johnson very favorably. Many of us are convinced we are on a better course. We are not being duped, we are not naïve. We are experienced DeKalb parents. Agree or not, I think many would assess us that way. Perhaps even Stan?
“Dekalb county shouldn’t get one red cent from my household. They have failed my family miserably.” Sorry to hear. Despite all the craziness over the past 12 years we’ve been in the system, they’ve never really “failed” us (but they’ve certainly made it more difficult than it should have been).
Why no true failure? Mainly because the HH principals & teachers never failed my kids.
Anonymous: Wanted to say that I appreciate your posts here. We don’t always agree, nor should we. You seem well-informed and thoughtful. Not sure where you are from, but it doesn’t matter. Continue anonymously if you wish, but I’d like to know more of the anonymous posters here, especially up here in Region 1. I use to be Chamblee Dad, but no more. Transparency gives me a sense of freedom. Plus people can insult you by name.
Doraville residents alone can’t support a Doraville high school. I’m confident Huntley Hills is pushing hard for Option B to make sure none of them get redistricted into the Doraville cluster. That’s OK HH … Chesnut and Kingsley did the same thing.
DeKalb Inside Out. I would say your confidence is not well-founded. The value of proximity has always been a part of this process. The fact that so many from HH can & do walk to & from CCHS & CMS ( cutting thru the football field), makes any move unrealistic.
Agreed … the entire HH school would not feed into Doraville. But they have to fill the new elementary school in Doraville with somebody and fear of the unknown is a hell of a thing. DIO.
That’s OK HH … Chesnut and Kingsley did the same thing.
Gosh what a horrid position to take…Attend schools closest to where one lives. btw, the redistricting that will take place when the new Austin ES opens will be “interesting”.
Paula, I don’t understand either of your comments. What are you saying?
In September, DHS school council came out with their position recommending Option B. They were confident Option B would address their need for an art wing, choral room and a number of other renovations which Nancy and I guaranteed them there was no way the board or administration would put into the plans.
Was an art room, choral room included in Option A?
DIO – If any part of HH would even be considered for a pull into Doraville, it would generally be those from the lower socioeconomic areas to the east & south – although even then, unlikely. We have expressly pressed to keep those children in HH, not for fear of the unknown, rather fear of the known: Those kids are usually the first kids moved around, and often those without as vocal & organized a voice. They are part of our school family & they are still generally very close to the MS & HS, and certainly HH.
I don’t think either option included renovations or additions for the art room or choral room. Option A did address the over crowding for every single common space in the school. How is this building addition plan going to address capacity in the Gym. Tell me Paula, what are your thoughts about the 485 square feet addition planned for the cafeteria to go along with the 600 seat addition at DHS?
Thanks DHS school council … knocked that one out of the park.
Tell me Paula, what are your thoughts about the 485 square feet addition planned for the cafeteria to go along with the 600 seat addition at DHS?
I’ll form an opinion when I see the actual finalized plans.
There’s been enough personal insults and insulting language put towards those school councils that preferred Option B. That needs to end, starting with the BOE rep…..
DeKalb Schools COO Joshua Williams said, “The capacity additions will provide the needed classroom space plus any increase in core spaces (kitchen, cafeteria, gym, and media center) or parking that are needed to serve the larger school size based upon District and GA DOE standards.”
From what I can tell, the conceptual plans conform to “District and GA DOE standards.” I’m working on confirming that. Let me know if you find something non conforming.
In the process of confirming that, could you also confirm whether the state and district have any standards related to gym or locker room space and if there are any requirements related to administrative work space for assistant principals, counselors, social workers, psychologists based on school size? Given the size of the increases, these schools will need additional counselors and APs at a minimum to support the students. There doesn’t appear to be any information in any of the plans for these types of upgrades.
Stan, going back to your question on who was on the leadership team for DCPC last year, you can find the list at: http://www.dcpc-dekalb.org/p/contact-us.html. For the record, Allegra was not on the leadership team.
Of the six people on the team, only Erika and I were members of GLASS, and we intentionally kept political advocacy out of DCPC.
By the way, that is not a statement I can make about Parents Council United.
Ah, yes, Erika (not Allegra) … my apologies. So, you and Erika were co presidents of DCPC last year and members of GLASS. Perhaps you could give us an update on the status of DCPC for the 2016 – 2017 school year.
I don’t know. My term ended at the end of the last school year; I’m no longer active in DCPC.
Evan, I reviewed the links you posted. It seems that DCPC hasn’t been active this school year. On the DCPC website the last post is from December 2015. The Facebook page has a post from February 2016 and then not again until October 2016. The October post was from the Georgia Educator Blog. There were no posts shared from Stan Jester’s blog or any other opposing views regarding the recent eSPLOST V discussions. There were no meetings of DCPC. In fact, the list of officers for the DCPC are from the 2014-15 board. So DCPC hasn’t been active for the 2015-16, or the 2016-17 school years according to their own website and facebook page.
Evan – Stan is correct to question and wonder where DCPC is on this issue. DCPC seems to have dissolved itself.
As Scott mentioned above, “there’s a group starting to reconstitute to replace it with representation from the Dunwoody, Chamblee, and Cross Keys clusters called ‘Peachtree Gateway Parent Council’
I know they’re in the planning stages, having had 3 planning meetings. I think it is to be launched early next year.
The total budget for the District’s voter-approved E-SPLOST IV Program is $618.5 million of which $489.6 million has been collected in total program revenue as of period ending October 31, 2016.
So is it likely that $128.9 Million will be collected between November 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017?
That’s the difference between the E-SPLOST IV budget and the revenue so far.
For the remaining 8 month period of E-SPLOST IV, that’s $16.11 Million/month, versus the $9.41 Million/month that Mr. Williams reported has been collected during the first 52 months of E-SPLOST IV. (5 year program)
Maybe that’s reasonable. But it sounds like a lot to this guy.
I specifically asked Joshua Williams if we were tracking to collect what was expected and he said yes. $128.9 million is a lot to collect in 8 months. In FY2015 we collected $136.5 million. FY2016 we collected $120 million. The monthly financial reports don’t have Capital Outlay YTD … I’ll ask the Superintendent to add that. This will help us track that.
Update on next actions regarding DeKalb Schools’ 2017-2022 E-SPLOST V Program:”
1. Issuance of Request for Proposals for Program Management Services: December 2016 – Complete
2. Develop cost-loaded schedule and cash flow in support of the Board-approved project list and bond financing: December 2016 – February 2017
3. Issuance of RFPs for new Cross Keys HS and major additions of middle and high schools: January 2017
4. Board adopts Bond Resolution for $140 million issuance: February Board meeting (estimated Feb. 6, 2017)
5. Announcement of timing and selection of construction committees for the new Cross Keys HS and major additions of middle and high schools: February 2017
6. Bond funds ($140 million) available to the District: February/March 2017
7. Board approval of E-SPLOST project budgets and anticipated start and finish dates: March Board meeting (estimated March 6, 2017)
8. Sales tax revenues collections start for new E-SPLOST: July 1, 2017
Per the District’s financial system (TERMS), the E-SPLOST III and E-SPLOST IV capital totals fiscal year-to-date (June 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016) are as follows:
• E-SPLOST III – $15,344,348
• E-SPLOST IV – $33,844,808
@Stan:
5. Announcement of timing and selection of construction committees for the new Cross Keys HS and major additions of middle and high schools: February 2017
Is the committee only going to be members that are currently zoned CKHS? If so, that is totally not fair to all the stakeholders that would be going to that school. It seems that the county would have to open up the committee for anyone that would be zoned for that school once the school is complete. Don’t you agree?
IMHO, I think parents and stakeholders need to know where their child will be zoned for before construction starts so that the students that would use that building would have a better say on what the school needs.
You think this is years away like they said?!? Ha! They will have the bulldozers on site st CCHS this summer. Great learning environment with the ongoing symphony of jackhammers and cement mixers!
Good question Lynn. I’m not sure how they plan on doing construction committees for new schools where the attendance zone is unknown. I imagine, per that bullet point, in February they’ll let us know more about the selection process for the construction committee of the new Cross Keys HS. I’ll see if I can get more info on this.
This was the communication from Dr. Green in December regarding the construction committees:
@ Stan. I think that is an answer that needs to be answered NOW instead of later. CK does an excellent job tailoring their course selection to the needs of their community. Here is a short list of the unique course offerings that they have that CHHS does not. http://crosskeyshs.dekalb.k12.ga.us/Downloads/Bulletin%20Board%20Informational%20Pages2.pdf
Compared to the unique course offerings that CHHS currently has
http://filecabinet3.eschoolview.com/B733AAC2-B3E7-42D9-9F1F-8EB284393FA0/2016%20CCHS%20Course%20Catalog.pdf
If members of the CK community now are the only members of the new CK then students that have to move from CHHS to CK could possibly not have the building/classrooms they need to continue to offer these course selections and vis verse on the other side. CK stakeholders that would be moved to CHHS need to be on the CHHS construction committee as well.
So in reality, all stakeholders need to know where their student is going before these committees are announced.