Seattle school closures: District has no choice but to downsize its property holdings

Seattle Public Schools' plan to close six schools and relocate nine others will create a vacuum in communities and heighten parents' uncertainty about their children's academic futures.

Just as losing a job or a home would.

In better economic times, Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson would be advised to shed the district's stockpile of stately old buildings slowly so as to soften the blow — perhaps one or two schools every couple of years, always sold below market value to a community organization or nonprofit. Maybe she could take a page from King County Executive Ron Sims and place some of the schools in a virtual "lifeboat" and demand the state ante up to save them.

But these are not ordinary economic times. A deepening recession can no longer be denied, even by those who favor rose-colored glasses.

The district faces a $24 million deficit predicted to double by the next fiscal year. The state Legislature is poised to suspend — or worse, end — funding of two voter-approved initiatives that pay for smaller classes, teacher salary increases and other educational needs.

People may be frightened by the prospect of an empty building. I'm more frightened by the costs of maintaining that building after the state decides it is keeping $1.45 billion in education spending to deal with its own $5 billion deficit. I'll be terrified then.

In the days since Goodloe-Johnson unveiled her closures plan, reasonable questions have been raised about some parts of it. The schools chief and her aides ought to be prepared to vigorously defend their choices or embrace better alternatives. An anticipated new school-assignment plan will color the debate and we should all prepare for last-minute changes. But in the end, buildings ought to be closed.

I have long felt it was fiscally irresponsible of the district to hold onto unneeded, valuable land when it can barely afford the maintenance on them. Moreover, a collection of buildings means nothing if the teachers inside them must beg for extra planning periods and students are met with a raised academic bar but not the extra resources to get over it.

For a city that voted overwhelmingly for change in the most recent presidential election, we do not like it close up.

Charges that school closures will force a mass exodus are not an excuse to do nothing. A 2007 report on the impact of the last round of school closures shows that just over half the students in closing schools enrolled in their new ones. Considering district officials had expected to keep 80 percent of the students — its normal retention rate — this was disheartening.

But several things to keep in mind about those enrollment figures: A number of the schools that were closed always had higher transient numbers than did the district as a whole. Of 743 students from the closed schools, 366 students opted not to go to their new assignments and enrolled instead in another Seattle public school. A grand total of 154 students from the closed schools left the district. Whether they fled the closures or their families found new jobs or housing is anyone's guess.

But the biggest thing the district has going for it right now is the economy. People are losing their jobs. Those who still have them are hard-pressed to recollect their last pay raise. Private-school tuition can run from $10,000 to $20,000 a year. Those fleeing to nearby districts such as Shoreline or Bellevue must take into consideration that those districts also face budget challenges.

Education funding is a problem that can't be outrun.

The district must right-size itself, as a recent state audit proposed. It cannot afford to be one of the city's largest property managers. Goodloe-Johnson must show, again and again, how a smaller district creates efficiencies and improves academics. Yes, lowering any costs, including capital costs, improves the bottom line, but a great deal of specificity is necessary to quell public angst.

For example, the superintendent must make clear why Lowell Elementary School, which houses gifted students enrolled in the Accelerated Progress Program, should be closed. For me, this is about more than academics.

An otherwise rationale person and Seattle schools parent told me the decision to move APP to two south end schools, Thurgood Marshall and Hawthorne Elementary, is proof the programs are being "given to the minorities."

Ugly? Yes. And untrue. But Goodloe-Johnson's plans must hold up under such scrutiny or the ugliness multiplies.

Lynne K. Varner's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is lvarner@seattletimes.com; for a podcast Q&A with the author, go to www.seattletimes.com/edcetera