Families will be demonstrating Tuesday night as the Seattle School Board is scheduled to be updated on Superintendent Brent Jones’s plan to begin a painful period of campus closures including the shutdown of Capitol Hill’s Stevens Elementary next year.
Friday night, Stevens families were left mostly frustrated in a question and answer session with Seattle Public Schools officials on hand to justify the recommendation to shutter the North Capitol Hill campus and move its students to nearby under construction Montlake Elementary as part of a plan that would begin with four schools closing in the 2025-2026 to help address an expected more-than-$130 million budget deficit.
Repeated details from officials Friday night of the long, multiyear, and seemingly predestined path to shutting down Stevens left many parents frustrated about what will only be around a $1.5 million a year savings, the district says, from the school’s consolidation with nearby Montlake.
“The moment that Montlake went under construction, we knew Stevens was on the slate to be closed,” one parent told the assembled SPS representatives.
CHS reported here on the questions around the proposed Stevens closure after it emerged as one of four Seattle elementary campuses on a list of planned “consolidations” as the district backed down from an initial plan that could have cut 21 campuses from the system after public outcry.
Friday night, district officials repeated the overarching message of what could be a series of shutdowns over the coming years. “Schools need to be a certain size” to be efficient and make sure the district is financially viable,” with “appropriate scale, and appropriate design,” one official said.
“We are the only district in Western Washington that operates with enrollments under 300. We have 29 of those.”
Friday, district officials acknowledged, though limited in size, the Stevens campus is in satisfactory condition but said the closure recommendation factors were shaped in combination with evaluating the strength the overhauled Montlake Elementary will bring to the school system. CHS reported here on how SPS is overhauling and expanding the Montlake Elementary campus as a centerpiece in the system.
Under the district’s evaluation, the Stevens Building Condition Score of 2.10 is the lowest among the four district campuses recommended for closure in this first round of consolidation. The driving factor for the low score? Efficiency. The district’s evaluation says Stevens lacks “good weather seals on the doors and some of the window” and “does not appear to be insulated.”
The campus buildings are in reasonably good shape and well maintained. There are some areas showing wear, such as the older carpet and wood flooring that are now showing their age. The primary concern is lack of good weather seals on the doors and some of the windows. The other significant energy efficiency issue is that the roof for the older building does not appear to be insulated.
Meanwhile the district is planning a $148 million addition and modernization of Capitol Hill’s Lowell Elementary School as part of its next levy proposal hoped to go to voters this winter.
One parent raised questions about possible other paths that would keep Stevens open including splitting grades across Stevens, Lowell, Montlake, or nearby Meany Middle School, an option the district did not directly address Friday night.
The future of the Stevens campus, meanwhile, would be determined by a process to evaluate the property as “important public assets” to determine “highest and best” uses that could also “bring revenue to the table.”
Officials said Friday night that the Montlake construction is on track for a spring or summer completion, saying the project is close to “substantial completion” and should “easily be ready” by the fall.
If the Stevens closure recommendation is approved by the school board, officials also promised Friday that the district will be ready to support Stevens kids in their change to the new campus with transition to the new school, welcome events, a summer jumpstart and bridge programs.
In its consolidation analysis (PDF), district says demographics are comparable across the Stevens and Montlake student populations.
Tuesday night, the school board will hear an update on “Superintendent’s Recommendations for School Closures per Board Policy No. 6883, School and Instructional Site Closures.” The All Together For Seattle Schools group says it will be demonstrating before the session “to show support for the four schools being targeted by SPS for closure, and to show opposition to the District’s plans to close more schools in future years.”
“Parents across the city have demonstrated numerous flaws in the District’s closure plans, including a lack of financial savings and the resumption of enrollment growth,” the group says.
Another parent group says it has filed a complaint in King County Superior Court for permission to collect signatures to mount a recall against school board president Liz Rankin over the shutdown process.
There will be more opportunities for questions — and hopefully, more answers — at Stevens. The district has said it plans to hold two meetings at each of the schools targeted for closure before public hearings required by state law would be held in December. The board could vote on a final plan in January.
Friday night, one parent raised an issue district officials and the board will also have to wrestle with. With projected enrollment already falling and contributing to shortfalls in revenue, how much will the mess around cutting district schools add to further erosion of the city’s public school student population?
“If we are closing elementary schools every year for the next few years, the impact will be reduced enrollment,” the parent said.
It was another issue schools officials did not have an answer to Friday at Stevens.
The public hearing on the recommended closure of Stevens Elementary will be held at the school (1242 18th Ave., E, Seattle, WA 98112) on December 10, 2024, beginning at 6:30 PM.
UPDATE: An effort to shape a new Political Action Committee dedicated to shaping state education spending is launching with a gathering on Capitol Hill. The Washington Families for Public Education PAC is holding its launch event Wednesday night at Stoup Brewing:
This event will provide an excellent opportunity to:
– Learn about our PAC’s mission and goals for the upcoming School Board 2025 elections
– Understand how you can get involved and make a meaningful impact on the future of Seattle Public Schools
$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE THIS SPRING
🌈🐣🌼🌷🌱🌳🌾🍀🍃🦔🐇🐝🐑🌞🌻
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.
Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for $5 a month -- or choose your level of support 👍
I’m super confused why parents are so desperate to keep Stevens Elementary open. What’s wrong with going to a slightly bigger school a little further away? Also, what will happen if the district doesn’t close all these schools? Will they cut librarians, school counselors and elective teachers at all grade levels?
I mean, the list for Stevens specific parents is likely expansive…but from the outside, I could guess keeping Stevens open would help maintain a consistency in students’ educational experiences and continuity among their social relationships. Also, with the Seattle school choice options diminishing, there is definitionally less “choice” if we keep closing schools. Also, I’m not sure if teachers can just be fired like that if they are unionized…
As a parent, why is it confusing that parents don’t want their kid’s public school closing down? We should have a functionally infinite state and federal education fund considering the pentagon can lose track of $1,000,000,000,000 (yes, 1 trillion dollars) and nobody bats an eye in congress.
I say outlaw private schooling as a concept and we never have to have this conversation again…
Stevens Elementary has 150 kids. It is, functionally, a private school. The price of admission is living in an incredibly expensive neighborhood. That’s what these families are fighting to preserve.
The net result of keeping Stevens open will be staff reductions at other schools in poorer areas of the district tried to balance its budget. This is segregation in action. I agree that it’s bananas that the pentagon gets way more money and way less oversight than education. I just want to be critical about why our community is resistant to change and what the larger community impacts would be.
Stevens is a diverse school, including socioeconomically, with onsite preschool, childcare, good building/outdoor spaces, a solid learning-environment score, decades-long community events, walkable/bikeable/near several bus lines, with space to hold nearly 400 kids. We want to make sure that those things continue, grow enrollment, and assure that any closure/consolidation the district pursues actually saves money and is well-thought out, minimizing disruptions to students, families, and neighbors. We want to make sure that planning takes into account not only savings that may occur via closures, but also spending on school construction and transportation costs so that implementation is fiscally responsible for all tax-payers and most importantly actually results in well-resourced schools that meet the academic and social-emotional needs of all students. We want communities to stay together. We want to protect diversity when boundaries are reconsidered. Stevens has fabulous student outcomes, which serves our entire population for generations to come. This should be replicated if not preserved.
Perhaps in the end, it will make sense for Stevens to close and consolidate, but we want to understand that it is actually in the community’s best interest before signing on.
PS-Vote to approve renewal of the levies in February and get involved in making sure the implementation serves us all!
vote for levies to build schools ? Hard no for me
1) the levies are replacement levies for ongoing costs that are not covered by the state, not new sources of funding. Voting No will only worsen the dire financial crisis our district faces.
2) the BEX levy funds technology and necessary building maintenance (roofs, HVAC, window replacements, ADA improvements, etc: they are listed out on the SPS website). The construction projects have to have approval from the school board before they are implemented and people are paying attention to make sure this happens responsibly-join us! School buildings have to remain safe for communities.
3) The EP&O levy stands for Educational Programs and Operations. Again this is a renewal and helps reduce the gap between state funding and actual costs of serving “special education, healthy student meals, and transportation.”
You are wrong about there not being new schools being built with the money, they are even purchasing more property.
Not that they are required to spend the money on what they put in the BEX levy, so it is more then likely that yet more funds will go to the Stadium that they are building for some unknown Professional Soccer team to use with Ticketmaster isn’t renting it out.
You should consider looking through all of the properties that SPS owns and see who all is getting a free building, utilities included.
Have you looked at plans for the BEX VI levy?
They’re asking for 1.8 billion (with a B) dollars for 3 projects. This includes 150m for a new elementary school. I cannot reconcile proposing this while planning to close 21 schools (or 4, but now maybe 0)
For reference:
BEX IV was $694M for 17 major building projects.
BEX V was $1.4B for 11 major building projects.
SPS Leadership fails to adequately manage anything but keeping their jobs. The architects of the “Well-Resourced Schools” were unable to answer the most basic questions at community meetings.
The optics for Superintendent Jones receiving a 6.7% pay raise doesn’t help.
I’ve voted yes on past levies and am voting NO to a school BEX VI in Feb 2025. I’m an active, public school advocate that’s tired of the unrealistic expectation to ask for more without any measurable result. Kids deserve more & it’s time we start expecting more accountability from SPS district leadership.
Stevens is nothing like a private school, you obviously haven’t toured any of the private schools or you wouldn’t make this comparison.
“I just want to be critical”, so what you mean to say is that you are here to be an asshole; this is what you have to contribute.
The school has a functional community of parents which interact with the school, it has a daycare, and it provides a playground.
Stevens is a drop in the bucket. SPS has 60+ directors, you could take a bigger bite out of the budget just by letting go the bulk of them.
The Principal that was promoted upwards after knowingly moving teachers around who had been caught being physically and sexually abusive to students? That Director makes well over a quarter of a million.
The staff working on the new $60+ million dollar stadium that will run by Ticketmaster? You could save the money for the rebuilding in order to upgrade a school, sell the land to cover the debt, and get rid of a couple of professional/staff/directors who spend their time on it.
The money is there, it is just being wasted.
The district will not be cutting things only at poorer schools in order to save Stevens. This is not what they do now. The district allocates funds in an equitable way–high poverty schools have lower staff to student ratios and get more support staff than high income schools. High poverty schools also receive additional discretionary funds from SPS. This type of poor vs rich school narrative with false information is part of the problem. It divides communities, spreading misinformation.
What else would you like to outlaw? Just askin’
Wouldn’t you like to know lol. We’re talking about supporting public schools–eyes on the ball.
The catch is that the bigger school is Lowell which is the assigned elementary school for all of the downtown homeless shelters. So it probably looks on paper like a bad school because a lot of struggling students get sent there.
I feel for the Stevens’ parents and their kids. If there would only be a savings of $1.5 million if closed, why not reduce the huge budget for the Lowell remodel ($148 million) by that amount and keep Stevens open?
It’s a little treasure that school. I never went 2 full years to any school. Closures, bussing, moving and divorced parents meant I was never in one place for long.
By the time I was 15 years and 2 weeks old. I left home with nothing but the clothes on my back. I slept under bridges so if a cop came I could run across the freeway. They won’t chase me I figured… I was right.
Many of these kids will never see their best friend at school. Or their boyfriend. Their favorite teachers. The commute to and from school longer.
It’s far more devastating than we adults think it is. I mean, I didn’t want a haircut. I still remember the fit I threw…lol
As very long-time district watcher, maybe I can help.
First, operation funds and capital funds are different pots of money. You cannot use capital funds to fund operations. Supposedly. I say that because, over time, the district has moved 90% of the technology department funding over to the BEX levy. Personally, I think that’s insane. And, the district has been inquiring about using more capital dollars. (Plus they borrowed money out of capital that HAS to be paid back with interest within a year. Good luck to that,)
Second, one thing driving this situation is that the district quietly made the decision. – probably 15 years ago – that they wanted to have fewer elementaries and make them bigger. So they decided on certain schools to expand like Montlake, Viewlands, Alki, John Rogers, etc. They have built these huge buildings and they aren’t going to fill them with regular enrollment.
So they KNEW when they started this plan that they would need to close schools. Did they tell voters of the levies this at the time? Of course not. I was told – repeatedly – that Montlake could never be rebuilt because it has one of the smallest plots of land for any elementary. Their solution? Increase the enrollment but take space from the playground.
The district does have many high-cost staff at JSCEE. In fact, they hired a recent college grad to be “deputy chief of staff.” His boss makes about $200K so I would guess he’s getting at least $100K+. Nice work if you can get it and I ask – why was it so very important for the chief of staff to get an aide?