I grew up two blocks from North Bethesda Junior High School in the suburbs of Washington, DC. (Nowadays we call those “middle schools.”) I did not attend NB, though. Instead, I rode a very smelly bus to Tilden Intermediate, which took a good half hour each way, because I’m part of the smallest cohort to be born between the Boomers and Gen Y. This after we absorbed another elementary school into ours in our fifth grade year. So I understand “right sizing.” I’m prepared to accept difficult decisions, including school closures, provided a robust, impartial analysis is conducted and shared with stakeholders. PPS has not yet shown enough of its work to justify the specific recommendations it has put forward, particularly in Southwest Portland.
Lots of cute tag lines, light on actual analysis
The October scenario sheet tells us what each scenario accomplishes: Scenario A closes 14 schools and moves 27% of K–8 students; Scenario B closes 11 and moves 24%. It also reports how many schools and students would be above the district’s enrollment-based “sustainability” thresholds. Absent are explanations of how PPS came to these conclusions.
PPS says it considered much more than enrollment — so show those inputs
In the Rightsizing FAQs, PPS says decisions will be guided by data, community input and multiple principles, and that no single factor will determine outcomes. However, “sustainability” appears to be driving this smelly bus.
“Equity” is repeated frequently but not adequately defined. The scenarios released in October reference historically underserved and economically disadvantaged students who attend a sustainable school, and aim to increase that proportion. Without an understanding of the basis for “sustainability,” I worry that the very students this program purports to champion will in fact have to commute farther to a more crowded school, rather than receiving additional support or resources closer to home.
Southwest especially needs a transparent alternatives analysis
PPS points prominently to the Southeast Enrollment and Program Balancing work, including an SEGC school-by-school analysis and subsequent equity audit, as background for the present process. Neither of these documents contain the word “Southwest.” There does not appear to be an equivalent recent public process in which competing configurations of West-side schools and sites were modeled and compared. It’s understandable that the scenarios feel arbitrary – as far as we can see, they are.
Has the analysis team crossed the river?
PPS possesses extensive physical-facilities information. Its Facility Condition Assessment covered 94 educational sites and assessed building systems, deficiencies, remaining useful life, ADA accessibility and estimated repair costs. PPS explicitly says that database is intended to support institutional planning and decision-making. These factors are not cited in the October scenarios, however, and I had to hunt for quite a while to find any of the actual data.
Maplewood, which is slated for closure under both scenarios, has a large greenfield area, a forested “outdoor classroom,” and a location in a low-traffic neighborhood. Capitol Hill, by comparison, has less acreage, mostly paved outdoor space, and one side of the site bordered by Interstate 5. While information is incomplete, Maplewood has also had more recent earthquake retrofitting, according to the Long-Range Facility Plan published in 2021. This document also “envisions” schools with a gymnasium separate from the cafeteria, a stage, and outdoor learning spaces (see page 68), and an elevator, all of which Maplewood has. The new scenario continues the odd gerrymandering of South Waterfront into the Capitol Hill neighborhood, when many of these students would probably be better served to go to Reike, or another school with some green space.
Slow down, show your work, and get it right
Having spent quite a bit of time in the Maplewood building, I will readily admit it’s not perfect. The cafeteria is a basement. The blacktop wants a cover (which the parents have been trying to crowdsource for years). I’d love to see PPS build a brand new, state of the art facility, perhaps on the Smith site, and shut Maplewood’s building down for a total rehaul. How about we sell the district office and use the funds for that project. It sounds like there will be lots of buildings available in which the administrators can work on the analysis we have requested in the meantime.
