GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

space wars

Parents contest charter schools proposed for crowded District 2

A hearing about Success Academy's proposed expansion into District 2 drew a standing-room-only crowd Tuesday evening.

A public hearing to discuss Success Academy’s bid to open two new charter schools in Manhattan’s District 2 next year was dominated by angry residents who said the district’s schools are too crowded to share space.

Parents from the district and members of its elected parent council said they opposed the proposal from the charter network because the district — which includes the Upper East Side down through Greenwich Village, Tribeca, and Lower Manhattan — is already overcrowded.

The council passed resolutions at the end of March calling for Success Academy to find its own building instead of moving into existing public schools and for a moratorium on charter school applications in the district.

“You can come in if you’re invited, but if the families are saying don’t come in, I don’t think you should come in,” said Shino Tanikawa, president of the Community Education Council for District 2. Tanikawa said she thinks of charter schools as “vampires.”

Most parents at the public hearing had children enrolled in one of the six schools located at the Julia Richman Education Complex on the Upper East Side or P.S. 158, whose co-located school, P.S. 267, is set to depart for its own space in September.

“What you’re essentially trying to do if you want to get into the complex is put 14 pounds of sand in a 10 pound bag,” said Guy Workman, whose daughter attends Talent Unlimited High School in the Richman Complex.

Widespread crowding is nothing new in District 2, and neither is criticism of Success Academy schools: The charge that it should find its own space has followed the network, which is run by former City Councilwoman Eva Moskowitz, virtually wherever it has sought to open.

In February, a hearing about the network’s application for a school in Brooklyn’s Williamsburg attracted hundreds of people, both supporters and protesters who said the network shouldn’t get public space because it had not adequately recruited among Spanish-speaking families. That same month, a group of parents from Cobble Hill filed a lawsuit against Moskowitz and Success Academy to prevent the charter network from moving into a neighborhood school building. The two schools are among three the network is set to open this fall.

The network regularly encourages current parents to speak out at hearings about its proposed schools. On Tuesday, Ryan Dunn, the mother of twin boys who attend the network’s Upper West Side location, said Success had sped the progress of one son who had special needs. Parents should have a choice to be able to try to find alternative to their zoned schools, said Dunn, who was then interrupted by shouting from the small, crowded room. “People wouldn’t send in applications if there wasn’t interest,” Dunn added.

Neither Moskowitz nor representatives from the State University of New York charter board, which must approve the network’s application to open the new schools, attended the meeting, held at the Department of Education’s Midtown office.

So critics of the proposed schools directed their remarks toward the Recy Dunn, executive director of the city’s charter schools office. Parents questioned Dunn about which schools would be chosen to share space with incoming Success Academy schools, if the applications are approved, and over the late notification prior to the meeting.

“It was, as many parents said, very last minute. None of the PTA was able to come, so I’m going to be reporting back the information I got,” said Doris Moreira-Douek, whose daughter attends P.S. 2 in the Lower East Side near Chinatown. She found out about Tuesday’s hearing in a school letter sent home last week and said parents at P.S. 2 were prepared to fight if the department picks it to house a Success charter school.

The Department of Education typically places charter schools in space that it says is underused. The department has acknowledged the sweeping scale of overcrowding in many parts of District 2, and a spokeswoman for the Success Charter Network, Kerri Lyon, said today that it would only seek space in school buildings that are underutilized. Lyon said the network’s Upper West Side school had received 100 applications from District 2 families this year.

A handful of elementary schools in the district are not operating at full enrollment, especially in Chelsea and Hell’s Kitchen, and multiple high schools in the district are being phased out, which would open up additional space.

The Department of Education has opened several new elementary schools in District 2 in recent years and another, the Peck Slip School, is set to open in September. Parents at the hearing said they preferred available space to be given to a new public middle school. They also said they weren’t against the charter network but argued that the schools should find locations outside of the district’s packed schools.

“The relationships that we built across the grades and across the different schools are amazing,” said Joshua Satin, vice-principal of Ella Baker School in the Richman Complex. “It’s a great place and it should not be touched.”

Success Academy Charter Schools has also applied to open a school in East Harlem’s District 4 next year and three new schools in Brooklyn. Mayor Bloomberg has said he is encouraging the network to expand quickly, and the six schools would be the most the network has opened in a single year.

Rose D’souza is a graduate student at Columbia University’s journalism school.

  • Noryeln

    I hope that the parents in D 2 remember that their comments may not be considered by the SUNY Charter Schools Board.  They consider the commentsof the school district and SUNY sees NYC and all 32 of the geographic districts differently than we do in NYC and the boroughs.  They see the City as a whole and as one district.  These folks need to get to the SUNY people and the their elected officials if they want their voices to be heard

  • Anonymous

    SUNY should stop approving schools without a specific location attached that people can actually discuss. It causes a lot of community upheaval to go through these divisive hearings.

  • Locusdragon1

    No one cares about what the parents/residents think about adding charters in district II.  The D.O.E. does whatever it wants and does not take into consideration the feelings of parents.  Parents are ZERO here in the city – they have NO SAY and a regarded as jokes.  This is why the D.O.E. has dominated over the years – there is no parental involvement.  In other towns, cities, etc ……. this stuff just is not tolerated, the parents are just too smart and too involved!  PERIOD!

  • http://twitter.com/juniper9119 R

    I don’t think anyone even reads the charter application.  I looked through it and it said repeatedly that District 2 has many underperforming schools, which it doesn’t.

    There is also a section providing evidence of community support which was a complete joke.  It included a collection of emails they received through the “Contact Us” form on their website.  It included a parent in New Jersey requesting a school, a teacher in California who wanted to visit a school, and one email merely contained the letter “P”.

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    Have the potential locations been identified?  If not, I don’t see how it’s possible to have a real debate about whether there is or isn’t enough space for co-locations.  

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Not a single building in D2, including high schools, has the 600 or so seats Success 1 OR 2 will need at full build-out.  And that’s according to the DOE’s own Underutilized Space Memorandum, which many of us believe overstates the amount of space available.

    So the question remains, which schools that DON’T have room are they eyeballing, to get their foot into, as only squeezing out the current occupant(s) will allow them their full buildout?

    If we have any buildings lying around with 600 empty seats, I think we’d all know.

    The better question is: why authorize one, let alone TWO, new schools — charter or even traditional — WITHOUT knowing where they’d fit? 

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Note further that the K wait list problem in D2 is so pervasive despite a number of new schools (and by this I mean new buildings) — thousands at risk, hundreds STILL on the wait lists at schools in most areas of D2, from Lower Manhattan to the Village to Midtown to the Upper East Side — that anxious parents would sign anything as a hedge.

    To whit: a good number of D2 families have applied to charters… on the Upper West Side, uptown or across Central Park.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

     Other towns and cities… with Mayoral Control, let alone as practiced here?

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Charters benefit from this contrived game of blind man’s buff.  Get the “charter authorization” first.  In the dark. Then grab enough space to launch, maybe with a promise to move out later.  Then put the squeeze on.

  • bee

     Debate doesn’t matter- those charters, despite the lack of support from the community, despite lack of space, despite the fact they aren’t needed in the community will be authorized. Is there such a thing as debate with Bloomberg’s DOE anyhow?

  • Mr. Flerporillo

    I can’t argue with any of that. 

    Does the DOE report on space utilization school-by-school?  I’d like to see what it has to say about my kids’ school.

  • teacher1233345435

    As a former Moskowitz employee, she will get what she wants.  She is committed to her mission and will bulldoze over ANYONE to get it done.  She is all about expansion even if the community doesn’t want it.  Good luck district 2.  Eva is coming.

  • http://twitter.com/juniper9119 R

    I was actually approached by one of their canvassers.  He asked if I wanted to sign a petition for a new elementary school in the neighborhood.  I recognized the Success logo and declined, but most wouldn’t, and who wouldn’t sign a petition for more schools?  The beauty is that many of those signatures are from out of district.

    But apparently, according to the SUNY charter committee application guidelines, the charter applicant gets to define the geographic area that constitutes the “community” and are specifically not constrained by DoE designated districts.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Oooh… sounds rather… Queen Borg-ian.

    I take it that “mission” includes a compensation package higher than President Obama’s, and an attempt at higher management fees in spite of some management consolidation.  So much for Econ 101 and economies of scale I guess.

    And yet the Daily News editorial board equates all that with school reform in general.  Sheesh.

    Charters were never envisioned to be a parallel school system. Or so I thought.

    And what transferable lessons should we take from charters’ independence from central oversight?  Small class sizes matter?  High staff turnover is a good thing?  Nudging out students at will helps your test score?  Got it.

  • bee

    “Parallel school system” interesting concept. Still perhaps “parallel school system,”  produces a more benign image than the more realistic image of nematodes and other parasitic entities.

  • D2 Parent

    I attended last night’s meeting and was dismayed to learn that no one from the SUNY charter board was in attendance to listen the concerns of the community. Does anyone have the contact info for SUNY charter board?

  • Anonymous

    Last time we saw JREC parents was when the city was considering a land swap with Hunter. How many kids that go to school there actually live in D2?

  • Lisa Donlan

    If only! What can the electeds do?
     Under mayoral control, even their voices carry no weight! Unless you are a well connected muck-a-muck of the highest order, like Speaker Quinn or Assembly Ed Comm Chair Nolan, then protesting a coloco or closing does you no good-  ie:the UW Success coloco at Brandeis, where virtually every elected (except the MBP) spoke out against it.
     For NADA!

    As for SUNY- really? It is nothing but a rubber stamp of its Charter School Institute, that is itself a license to print charters. The SUNY CSI staff makes up the rules according to its own agenda (more charters!).

    According to GC Ralph Rossi the mandated “district input” is only input form the Chancellor, as he is the district, according to Rossi, under mayoral control.
     Folks, we have no voice, this is NOT about what is good for kids and communities.
     No, it is a mission to replace our public education system with private interests.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    Public education needs to be politicized and democratized, else it will be privatized and corporatized.

    Mayoral control is education tyranny.

  • Joe Herrera

    Charter schools serve public school children. Charter parents pay taxes for those buildings that you claim are “yours”. 771 schools co-located and less than 10% are charter schools. Charter schools do not receive funding for facilities so co-locations are a neccessity in many cases. Oh how could i forget Charter schools have longer school days, higher standards, rigorous curriculum, and yes that darn old Accountability. The only thing they do not have is Union Dues. That is the true nature of this war.

  • Pogue

     You may be late into the game, but your charter diatribe is old BS.

  • Michael M. (parent still)

    So… Which D2 school(s) do you think are worth displacing?

  • bee

     Charter schools serve only some public school children at the expense of other school children and public school communities. Public school parents pay taxes for those buildings that ought to be used to educate public school children. The idea that charter schools are the gold standard of “accountability,”is laughable. You know darned well that charters are authorized for 5 years and sometimes reauthorized even when there are indications/proof of mismanagement and sometimes malfeasance. Your argument that charters have higher standards and have a more rigorous curriculum than public schools is nothing but poppycock, -PROVE IT! Charter schools claim to work better by being autonomous, yet they seem to forget about autonomy when it comes to squeezing public school children out of their rightful space. I think it’s an outrage that my tax dollars are used for charter schools at all, especially given that charters don’t perform better as a whole than public schools, don’t educate the same percentages of special education and ELL students, and are simply financially unsustainable. (precisely why the charter CEO’s like Eva are pushing to take over buildings in neighborhoods that are gentrified.) As for your slash and burn work force of Teach for America teachers, and directors/CEO’s with little or no educational experience, the soil planted so hastily with corporate engineered seeds, will soon be depleted….. leaving a desert in its wake.

  • http://twitter.com/juniper9119 R

    “Charter schools do not receive funding for facilities”

    Who is responsible for “wear and tear” to common areas (gym, cafeteria, etc)?  Who is responsible for maintaining the classrooms used exclusively by the charter?  Does that money come out of the host school’s budget?  (This is not a sarcastic inquiry…)

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

10 comments so far today

Archives

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031