Left rectangle ads redesigned
Robert Ripps book
History of Tribeca Buildings
Is P.S. 150 Being Moved to Chelsea?
A parent forwarded me this email from Jenny Bonnet, principal of P.S. 150/Tribeca Learning Center. The word is that parents are planning to demonstrate during Saturday’s Tribeca Family Festival.
Dear P.S. 150 Families,
Today, an SLT meeting was called by District 2’s Superintendent, Mariano Guzman, to discuss the future of P.S. 150. Due to overcrowding issues in our downtown schools,questionable economic viability of a small school, concerns about professional development and lack of opportunity for collaboration for our teachers and expanded opportunities for our students, there has been a proposal to move P.S. 150 to a new state of the art school building that is being constructed in the NY Foundling Hospital on 17th Street and 6th Avenue, for the 2014 – 2015 school year.
The Department of Education realizes that this will be an unexpected inconvenience and shock for many of you. They will do everything they can to make this transition as smooth as possible (yellow school buses, for example). I hope you will see this as an extraordinary opportunity for your children. In 2014, we will open as a PK – 5th grade school, but the only grades that will be fully populated will be Pre K and K. So, your children will not lose that sense of intimacy, but will reap the benefits of all this new building has to offer.
I know you will have questions and concerns, as I still do as well. We will have a parent meeting next week, date TBD. I will let you know as soon as it is scheduled. I am hoping that as a community we can band together, support one another and take P.S. 150 to a new, exciting level and make next year a banner one.
Tomorrow I will be sending you a powerpoint that shows renderings of the new school. I think you will agree that they are remarkable.
Yours,
Jenny
22 Comments
Medium rectangle #1 (top)
Right column rectangle ads
Mega rectangle
Restaurant guide icon
Someone seems enthusiastic here. Parents and families got screwed. Something is not right.
It is entirely wrong.
No one knew about this until 5:30 pm last night.
Not a peep before that.
It seems very underhanded.
The Chelsea parents must be ecstatic that they fought for a new school and when it opens it will be filled with TriBeCa kids. Closing a school in an overcrowded neighborhood and moving those kids to another overcrowded neighborhood sounds classic DOE logic. How does moving 4-10 year olds out of their neighborhood benefit anyone?
“Due to overcrowding issues in our downtown schools” we are going to eliminate a downtown school?! It’s absurd. When is the DOE going to wake up and realize this is a major problem?
Schools schmools! Our time & 5-hour energy is better spent fast-tracking the NID tax, so that we can collect/waste $11 million annually to stop the HRP from following into the Hudson! We also need to find the money to design lavish pedestrian bridges over the West Side Highway because the existing asphalt crosswalks are too dangerously simple for some. Tribeca is under siege and if we don’t spend our money unwisely now, then we will drown in our children’s tears and runny noses. More importantly, does anyone know when the Friends of HRP’s annual gala is this year? I need to find a tie that goes with my wife’s inappropriately low-cut, yet Diane von Furstenberg-y, dress. You know, for the photo-ops!!
Ah, the DOE, always on that proverbial fine line between clever and stupid. Parents in the 276, 234, 89, Peck, and Spruce zones will just pull their kids out of school and enroll them in their zoned school, which will only overcrowd downtown schools more. Also, remind me if I’m wrong — while 150 used to be zoned for all of district 2, didn’t they re-zone 150 to be filled only with kids from the 276, 234, 89, Peck, and Spruce zones, to alleviate crowding? Bet the DOE forgot that. Silly to move 150 and not just grow a new school in Chelsea. When that building’s done, of course, because in DOE construction-speak, 2014 = 2016.
Forgive my naivete, but what’s so “wrong” or “underhanded” about finding out about a proposal the other night which won’t actually take effect (if implemented) until the 2014-2015 academic year? How much advance notice do we actually need? 2 years, 5 years? I honestly don’t know.
The level of backlash and outrage I’ve seen on this page and other local sites is a bit alarming, to say the least. How can anyone logically argue with a plan to improve our school (admittedly, by re-locating it)? To be re-located in a better facility, with greater access & resources for our children? Let’s be honest and talk about the 800 lb. gorilla in the room: we are upset because of the disruption this will present to our lives, daily routines, etc. Gone may be the days of walking across the street or a quick subway ride to drop off the children each morning. I get that; it’s an inconvenience, but nothing more than that. So let’s move beyond such superficial ‘paper cuts’ and not lose sight of the fact that under this proposal, the school is MOVING, not CLOSING or being eliminated (and, further, not to another borough, but to Chelsea – 9 mins by taxi, 15-20 mins by bus or subway, or worst, 30-40 mins by walking, according to Google Maps). Due to the overcrowding issues and changing demographics of our neighbourhood, saving our school could very well mean moving it. Anyone knows that maintaining the “status quo” for the sake of maintaining the status quo is not a very good argument. In fact, I know my own initial shock (and clearly that of others) was a knee-jerk, visceral response, based purely on emotion, without knowing all the facts.
Indeed, all of the facts here have yet to be uncovered and our questions still need to be answered. As parents and more importantly rational adults, we owe it to ourselves and our children to give this time, learn more about the DOE’s plans (again, for 2014-2015) and refrain from hasty, petulant cries of wrong doing or harm perpetuated against our small community.
Let’s also do ourselves a favour and keep the extant gossip, the “not-in-my-backyard” herd mentality, all these silly emails back-and-forth, and the on-line websites & media blitz campaigning to a minimum until we know more. Indeed, let’s try not try to rabble-rouse; stick to the facts as we know/learn them and, above all, be civil about all of this.
Based on what we ultimately hear at our parent meeting, however, let’s not forget we have an arsenal of choices at our disposal – potentially moving along with the school (if the proposal does indeed move forward), enrolling in another school in our zone or elsewhere in the city (public or private) or even moving out of the neighbourhood or city altogether if we can’t find the necessary resources or environment we deem suitable for our kids. If that’s not good enough, and we truly want to have a vested stake in our children’s education, then homeschooling is yet another available option. It’s not like any of these are out of our reach (for financial reasons or otherwise, despite the headaches or inconveniences it may create), so let’s not kid ourselves and act like we’ve already been expelled from the neighbourhood when nothing has even happened.
Finally, I caution everyone try to keep the debate classy and keep it directed squarely at the DOE. Reports of planned protests at our students’ performance at the Film Festival this weekend will not only embarrass and affect our children, but the actions of some is quite frankly gauche and make all of us look like a bunch of self-serving, horses a$@es with rich people problems in the process. We’re better than that. I count our family lucky to be part of this unique, tight knit community which we’ve all helped create over the years and, together, we shouldn’t lose sight of that by acting hastily or prematurely ringing the alarm bells and, by doing so, undermining precisely the one and only thing we should be focused on: getting the best education for our children, wherever that may be.
Jenny’s letter states that this is a PROPOSAL. The letter states that the PROPOSAL stems from DOE concerns over: (1) overcrowding issues in our downtown schools, (2) questionable economic viability of a small school, (3) concerns about professional development and lack of opportunity for collaboration for our teachers and (4) expanded opportunities for our students. Let’s break this down and then perhaps we can all have a proper debate about the merits of this PROPOSAL:
(1) “Overcrowding issues in our downtown schools”. MY TWO CENTS: It is my belief that by moving PS150 out of the neighborhood, they will simply be creating more of an issue for the remaining neighborhood schools as parents will enroll their children in the other TriBeCA, FiDi and BPC schools.
(2) “Questionable economic viability of a small school”. MY TWO CENTS: Without a budget it is difficult to address this, however, given that the school has flourished for close to 40 years it is difficult to accept this as fact. If this is truly a concern, the DOE should provide more details. The school benefits from a very active PTA and has done a terrific job of coming up with fundraisers (such as the Taste of Tribeca) to help supplement public funds. Is this really about money?
(3) “Concerns about professional development and lack of opportunity for collaboration for our teachers.” MY TWO CENTS:I love our teachers at PS 150 and want nothing more than for all of our teachers and administrators to have outlets where they can develop and to collaborate with others. If the administration and the teachers feel that this is a real issue, I am certain the PTA would work with them to try to address their concerns. I would like to see this issue addressed with the community, the PTA, and our neighboring schools rather than with DOE. This should not be a reason to move PS 150. This is news to me. Some teachers thrive in a small school and others need a larger network to operate (and/or hide). I love our teachers and think this “issue” should be addressed away from the discussion of moving the school.
(4) “Expanded opportunities for our students” MY TWO CENTS:I take offense to this one. Sure our school lacks certain things but it more than makes up for any shortcomings. This statement is offensive – I would take the love and sense of community that PS 150 possesses over a gymnasium any day.
I love PS 150, I love our kids, I love our teachers. I think Jenny is great and I think Jenny choose to come to PS 150 and I would like to think (while she can’t say this) she wants PS 150 to stay where it is. The DOE’s proposal doesn’t make sense to me. I hope they see our way or I hope they can convince us that their view is right. Let’s not let this PROPOSAL tear apart our community. Let’s figure out how to keep PS 150 where it is.
ConcernedM when choosing PS 150 you not only choose location, you choose the entire package most importantly the small community school environment. People spend a lot of money to buy homes in good school districts all over the country, it actually might be the number 1 consideration for any family. So yes, location and convenience does matter. If I wanted my 4-10 year old to go to school in Chelsea, I probably would have stayed in Chelsea. If I wanted my child to go to PS 234, I would have chosen PS 234 in Kindergarten. If I wanted state of the art facility, I could have moved to Spruce. PS 150 offers a very specific alternative to the larger schools in the neighborhood.
I am more concerned about the leadership of a larger school. The current principal is already having a hard time with the small school she has now. Leadership is lacking. Staff parents and children are unhappy. What will happen when she is given the keys to a bigger school?
ConcernedM, while it is legally a “proposal,” it was not really sold as that. So if you wake up one day and the DOE says we are moving your school to Chelsea and doubling the size of your enrollment during the first year with Chelsea kids and eventually tripling the size, it is shocking, and disingenuous. The DOE didn’t confer with anyone, they just had a meeting in which they seemed to portray this as a done deal. None of the issues they mentioned as reasons for relocation and increasing the size seem really plausible. The budget for next year, for the first time in years will work within the framework of DOE funds. Collaborative teaching is just one part of professional development–so if that is an issue, lets have a discussion about professional development, not find a red herring to chase. Maggie found many ways to address professional development that did not require we move the whole school. We had veteran (now retired) teachers at that school for years who were nothing less than rocks stars–amazing educators on all fronts. They did not have collaborations, and were fine with that. If you come looking for a job at 150, a fairly sweet placement for public school standards, you know what you are getting into. You are also getting a bunch of perks no other school offers.
Of all the things dangled in front of us, the most peculiar was the prospect of great facilities. Every single parent at 150 chose tight knit community school over facilities. I don’t really see how we can maintain the intimacy of the school in a different neighborhood at the scale the new school can accommodate–eventually 520 kids, most of them from Chelea. There will be no neighborhood Halloween Parade and all school concert on the stairs, no Arts Festival performance as we know it, no all school concert at Tribeca Film Festival Family Day. The very things that make us special will either not happen, or happen in cut up chopped off ways.
And our arts and enrichment budget will diminish due to lost fund raising opportunities and tripling head count.
While “relocation” is a fairly innocuous term, it is in essence the end of the school as we know it. As we evaluate options and preferences, lets be clear on what is really being “proposed.”
What kind of parents move into a neighborhood that is known for its overcrowded schools? And then why are these “concerned’ parents shocked that a new school can’t be built in a couple of days or their kids have to be moved to a less crowded school? Maybe these kids should have to fight it out in the school yard. The winners get to stay at PS 150 and the losers have to go to Chelsea.
TribecaMom, I don’t disagree with you or the importance of available schooling in the decision making process. However, It underlines some of the points I made earlier: flat-out objection to the idea because of the inconvenience(s) it may present to us and that a menu of choices are still available to us as parents, were the plan to move ahead. We made a choice to live in a city and put our children in a public school and a system where there will always be the risk of re-zoning or other such changes due to factors outside our control (which by default will affect real estate prices, especially in areas with “better” schools). As a very small school in an upscale neighborhood, perhaps that puts us under the microscope? Perhaps, but I honestly do not know.
More importantly, however, this doesn’t seem to be calling for closure of the school, but rather a potential move (for which, quite frankly, we should be thankful, if it happens). The DOE could easily come in and shutter things altogether – we like to think so, but PS 150 really doesn’t serve a wide enough spectrum of the broader student population in the area. It serves a niche and we are lucky to be part of that niche. As parents, we’ve grown to love the community at PS 150, so it’s naturally difficult to think of it no longer being here at our doorsteps.
My overriding concern here (and I stated this in my earlier post) is that we let our initial, visceral responses overwhelm ourselves and, in the process, our children suffer. Sadly, that seems to be playing out as expected – yesterday’s display of protests at the festival and children making posters and wearing t-shirts, was bordering on tasteless and embarrassing. As a fellow parent, the fact some will use their own children as pawns in this crusade is troubling on many levels and really make us all look like a petulant, entitled group of brats. Unless Chancellor Walcott or relevant members of the DOE were in the audience, enjoying the festival or our childrens’ performance, I’m not sure we accomplish anything of substance.
ConcernedM and Buzz – I couldn’t agree with you more. Of course parents value their children’s education and should try to make the best decisions for their family. But I’m not sure that upper-middle class entitlement and protesting at a film festival where there are no decisionmakers present is the best strategy.
As a family living in NYC, we expect the changes and inconveniences that come with urban life. City life is not geared to children and families only, but to a very broad range of people. I think the building of “Triburbia” (fka Tribeca) provided a false sense of suburban comfort (and homogeneity) for many parents, but the reality is we live on a tiny island with millions of people and there is nothing convenient about that, period. When I was a young single professional, I felt the inconveniences of city living just as much as I do now as a stay-at-home mom. I’m shocked that parents expect any sense of ease living in such a dynamic and busy city, especially with kids. I consider us so lucky that we can get food, groceries and laundry delivered!!
While the news about 150 is shocking and disappointing, is it really a surprise? City politics has always been loopy – not just in NYC but in SF and Chicago, too. Basically any major city will offer strange solutions. Local government is notoriously riddled with silly proposals and insensible priorities – like the recent proposal to ban large sodas – really??? What a waste of time. It’s certainly not surprising that they’d do the same in the education arena. They don’t care that your rent or mortgage is killing you.
I’m entertained by parents who want to stay in the city for “urban life” because they are too cool for the suburbs or find them “inconvenient,” but then place suburban expectations onto the city and point fingers at everyone for not providing what they’re looking for – which is a suburban existence in Manhattan. Hello, there is no such thing. Also, I’m not sure the Triburbian expectation for convenience was ever attainable?
Have parents considered that maybe they are at fault for buying or renting into a real estate boom downtown without researching whether the DOE and City were building any infrastructure around the new residences and the quadrupled population in Lower Manhattan within the past decade? Or perhaps parents were too gullible – falling for obvious marketing tactics of real estate developers? Do just a tad of homework on the District 2 site, LMDC, local news, string together some dots, and it’s easy to see that moving downtown for public schools is like playing roulette. Big game of chance. But people moved here anyways in lemming fashion without thinking about the realities. Are parents at fault for joining the groupthink that “TriBeCa schools are the best,” then crowding them all up and complaining about them being crowded? Seems like a self-induced problem too, not just a Bloomberg and DOE issue.
To echo ConcernedM – no one is forcing families to stay in Tribeca, pay exorbitant rents and mortgage, be riddled by school application stress, or contend with DOE politics. It all feels very “petulant child” to watch parents huff and puff about normal city life. Stinky commuting with everyone is part of city life. So is climbing stairs, paying attention to crosswalks, and strollering on the side of the sidewalk and not the middle. Coincidentally, Triburbian parents hate these things. If you want your kid to be a “city kid,” should they not have the true city experience? This might actually mean a commute to school, gasp! I think generations of Manhattan kids have been commuting to school for ages, why now is this such a terrible thing?
If the argument is that you pay a lot for property in Tribeca – then join the club and relate to any group of dwelling owners in the city. Its probably generally safe to say that city schools are not worth the $2-10mil premium you’re paying for that apartment, and you’d feel equally annoyed on the UWS, UES, etc. If you can’t hang, move to the real suburbs and get what you need. Oh right, the suburbs are “inconvenient” too, in that they are far and too “burbs-y” for our self-identified downtown cool.
I think the take away from all this is “convenience” and “child-rearing” don’t always go hand-in-hand – whether in the burbs or in the city. Add on top of that exorbitant cost of living, a city whose infrastructure doesn’t prioritize young families (but a huge diverse population) and a kooky local politics scene, then you have the makings of normal city life. Perhaps a lot of Triburbian parents are just frustrated by chasing the unicorn of suburban life in the city, as opposed to being upset that just one choice elementary school moved within its district. The school moving within district lines is a completely “normal” city response when you factor in bigger pictures.
Missing the old Tribeca,
UrbanMom
I have not read a substantive topical argument in this thread yet. Overcrowding is not an issue that is isolated to Tribeca, but rather, rapidly becoming of epidemic proportions throughout gentrified areas, particularly the Chelsea/West Village/and southern Manhattan. There are loads of new apartments (2 bedrooms!) but not enough seats in schools. Families are not at fault here.
The issue will only become exacerbated with the voluminous amount of new construction occurring all over the island. This city is about growing capital now, this is a fact, but there seems to have been a lack of provisions regarding infrastructure. Again, the families are not at fault.
Frankly speaking, we should all applaud those parents for desiring to get the word out that they wish to maintain their sense of community for their families be it at a film festival, street fair, or supermarket. These issues are worth fighting for, and forcing the city to plan properly should translate into a better quality of life for us all. Who would argue against that?
I would not wish to uproot my children and send them out of the neighborhood at that early of an age either. This isn’t an issue of wealthy, entitled families behaving as such, this is a common issue that rings at the core of most families.
ConcernedM,
There will be no PS 150 in Chelsea. It simply will not, and cannot exist in any of the same format.
1) It is a fact that over half of the parents will refuse to send their children to the proposed new site, resulting in a possible closure/ rezoning of the new school before it “opens”. It will force the school to either immediately accept students from throughout the West Village/Chelsea (particularly PS 3 and 41) who are also severely overcrowded. This effectively changes the entire concept of the small arts based community school that we are known for.
2) You will become severely underfunded and hence, might be forced into some extremely difficult decisions. The school, by order of the bylaws, will not be able to participate in Taste of Tribeca, which is our major funding source for the year. There will be no short term solution to recoup those losses.
3) You are accusing families of being inconvenienced. Accuse away. We will indeed be extremely inconvenienced. Not to mention, the local businesses who have relationships with families in that school. So it appears that what you are saying is that community failure is something not worth maintaining.
4)70% of public school, elementary aged, children attend their zoned public schools (I think the percentage is closer to 90% in Manhattan) – is it wrong to have expectations that our children experience the same as everyone else? Or, do you sense that because we appear to be of a different wealth class that we should be able to afford to make the adjustments to facilitate the migration? Either way, it’s a discriminatory statement to make, something that we do not teach our children in these schools.
5) The topline curriculum statement at PS 150 last year was “empathy”, now more than ever is this word more prescient.
6) You have been welcomed to join the conversation to express your viewpoint, but unfortunately, you have chosen the passive aggressive anonymous route. Knowledge is key in this proposed move. I am of the mind frame that you do not have all of the substantive information at your fingertips.
I am honored to be a part of this process of people of all walks coming together so quickly to maintain a key component of our community in the name of our children. This is a life lesson for us all.
What type of parent moves into a neighborhood that is known for its overcrowded schools and has people photographing their children in their apartments with tele-photo lenses?
In response to AnotherConcernedFather:
“4)70% of public school, elementary aged, children attend their zoned public schools (I think the percentage is closer to 90% in Manhattan) – is it wrong to have expectations that our children experience the same as everyone else? Or, do you sense that because we appear to be of a different wealth class that we should be able to afford to make the adjustments to facilitate the migration? Either way, it’s a discriminatory statement to make, something that we do not teach our children in these schools.”
PS150 is a choice school, not a zoned school. It has nothing to do with perceived wealth or discrimination. If you want to go to a local neighborhood school like 90% of NYC students, attend your zoned school. You can’t argue that the DOE is removing your zoned school because 150 isn’t it. Only approximately 1/3 of 150 students actually live in TriBeCa-proper anyway.
I have to agree with ConcernedCitizen. Jenny Bonnet is not the principal to lead a bigger school. She is incredibly unprofessional – my child once reported to me her verbatim swearing in her office. Crass. She lacks the experience. The learning environment survey reflects a drop in teacher satisfaction. Jenny’s hiring choices have been disastrous – look at grade 5 experiences and the fired assistant teacher too. She is not honest or upfront with the community and is incredibly disingenuous. I have no trust in her. 150 needs a leader now more than ever when we are so divided.
I most certainly appreciate where AnotherConcernedFather is coming from, and this entire debate has clearly stirred emotions on all fronts, but to charge me with making a ‘discriminatory statement’ is completely flawed and flat out incendiary. Please don’t misconstrue my comments and take them out of context. Nothing I’ve stated heretofore is either inflammatory or (as you characterize) discriminatory. I would agree with the previous comment; this has zero to do with perceived wealth or discrimination. The logic you present confounds me. I believe wholeheartedly that it is well within our expectation set that our children experience the same as everyone else. If anything, I think the move to Chelsea would ensure that happens. As members of the parent community, we are ‘entitled,’ that is to say, members of a lucky, franchised group who get to live in this neighbourhood, send our children to this ‘niche’ school, have access to resources (be in through Taste of Tribeca or otherwise) and connections to our local politicians and, ultimately, enjoy the privilege of having a voice to air our concerns. I’m sorry if this seems unpleasant or unfair, but to try and avoid the characterization of ‘entitled’ is moot.
As for the inconveniences, I’m not accusing, I’m purely stating fact and it’s precisely that which appears to be driving the bus off the cliff here. Living just a handful of blocks away from the school myself, my family would need to make some serious adjustments, so I’m not immune either. In fact, I do empathize with all of us who are potentially affected by this change. To argue the local business case, however, is a bit of a stretch. To think that, absent the existence of P.S. 150 in its current location, some of our family’s favorite places (like the deli up the block where my child likes to buy the occasional treat after school, or Square Diner or Girello’s Pizza) may fall on hard times is suspect, at best. I certainly hope they haven’t pinned their future prospects on our school alone.
But let’s not kid ourselves – this isn’t the same P.S. 150 it once used to be. Anyone who’s had a child come through in the last 10-15 years should be aware of that. To play devil’s advocate, perhaps a small, arts-based school no longer has a place in public education, where you are trying to ensure that all students indeed have the same educational experience (more or less)? I don’t have the right answer. However, what appears increasingly clear to me is that some are choosing to live in this alternate world (longing for “what was” or “used to be”) and denying ourselves “what (actually) is.” In one of the largest cities in the world and largest (and arguably, most influential) public education system in the country, with the additional stresses and demands of urban planning & development and changing demographics, you cannot reasonably expect to live in constant stasis. Call it what you like, but I prefer to live in reality.
To your final point, I would neither characterize my comments as passive nor aggressive. I am merely posting my thoughts here, just as you have and others in this thread. Thank you for ‘welcoming’ me to the discussion all the same. I don’t pretend to have the silver bullet for this problem, but I also don’t think we’re being honest with ourselves and how our community has changed over time. As for being substantively informed, I’ve had many conversations off-line with other parents and school officials and was at yesterday’s meeting with the Superintendent. I did a great deal of listening and it would have been nice to see greater turnout from other seemingly inconvenienced parents who wish to have a vested interest in the robust dialogue over the future of their children’s education. Aside from that, I am awfully happy to just agree to disagree.
AnotherConcernedFather-
“3) You are accusing families of being inconvenienced. Accuse away. We will indeed be extremely inconvenienced. Not to mention, the local businesses who have relationships with families in that school. So it appears that what you are saying is that community failure is something not worth maintaining.”
I don’t know if ConcernedM “accused” families of inconvenience, it is a fact. Your charged response only supports Concerned M’s point that parents are indeed more concerned with convenient logistics than quality education. If you really care about the child’s benefits of PS 150, why not follow the special school to Chelsea to continue receiving the benefits and being a part of that special community? I believe private schools are completely built on community as well, not just defined by geography. So are public G&T schools. Maybe its all upsetting because the move would actually require what city parenting has always demanded: going the extra mile and experiencing inconveniences to attain the best for your children. Not sure this is a new development in NYC, but it certainly goes against the “Triburbia think” that we can have it all – suburban life in the city. I think there is plenty of people/families to support the local businesses in tribeca? I’m not sure how that argument works, tho if you’re planning on boycotting local businesses because of a school move, that would be a shame and misdirected, even passive-aggressive.
“6) You have been welcomed to join the conversation to express your viewpoint, but unfortunately, you have chosen the passive aggressive anonymous route. Knowledge is key in this proposed move. I am of the mind frame that you do not have all of the substantive information at your fingertips.”
Isn’t signing “AnotherConcernedFather” just as passive-agressive since you are sharing your comments anonymously as well? Because ConcernedM doesn’t share your viewpoint doesn’t mean she’s passive aggressive. If anything she’s been quite sensible – 150 is a choice school within District 2. Chelsea is in district 2.
NatureoftheBeast –
Thanks for reminding us that this is actually a much greater citywide issue. I certainly concur and do worry about the fact that infrastructure was not or barely considered with the building boom of 2 bedrooms. But since this is no surprise, we as parents have to have contingency plans while the city catches up with its mistakes and we continue to press BOE to respond as quickly as possible. The problem is, local govt is bureaucratic and always behind. Also, while we may want to be here, they may not care. The city can only house and provide programming for so many people. You’re still right that families are not at fault in this regard, though we all can make choices in the time that we live in. It could be a timing issue, our generation will fight the fight for schools and the next generation will benefit. Or the city will just wait for all the families to leave and keep things status quo. Who knows.
But if we (families) want to garner support from our civic leaders, education officials and neighbors (with and without chidren), I would guess that informed and thoughtful arguments would rally better support. Your understanding that “this city is about growing capital now…. [and] a lack of provisions regarding infrastructure” is great. But the reason you “have not read a substantive topical argument in this thread” may be because there isn’t one. The argument that a PS 150 (a district-wide choice school) move will inconvenience 1/3 of the small school’s parents doesn’t support the greater issue of school overcrowding – which seems to be your (and frankly my own) focus. But you forget in writing your response that Triburbians don’t care about the greater good, they care about themselves. This entitlement is ultimately what gets in the way of any good reasoning, people are turned off by “I want what I want the way I want it,” including fellow neighborhood parents.
The parent response to 150 news felt more self-entitled and stubborn, versus focused on the greater good for all as you’ve hoped for. With the population boom in Tribeca, it does make more sense to focus on the bigger picture, but again this thread isn’t about the greater good but about one small specialized school.
I’m grateful that they want to build another larger school and are actually keeping rather than killing 150. They could have gotten rid of the program completely. But doesn’t seem to matter how special it is anyways bc 1/2 the parents won’t send their kids there if the school moves to Chelsea. So then how special is 150? Not special enough to travel for. If it’s not a stroller walk away, it’s not special anymore. So please stop using “special” as a reason to keep 150 downtown and focus on the truth of “it makes my life harder, wah!” And good luck garnering support for the latter.
Why are they moving PS 150 to Chelsea when the could just as easily move it to the new Peck Slip School? Everyone benefits, kids stay downtown and they already know the principal!
Any updates on 150 or any of the other wait-listing situation at 234 and 276?