Boston Public Schools' Long-term facilities plan dominates last week of budget hearings; in other hearings, Parks & Rec silent on White Stadium, Meija misses Climate Officer, & broken O'Bryant promise
Polls showing 60% of residents are for new big schools are like polls showing residents are for residential growth. Until it comes to their backyard the polls are irrelevant. Look at the public outcry when a very sound plan to relocate the O'Bryant was proposed. Electeds ran away. What about a very sound plan to turn around Charlestown High two years ago? A tiny outcry and political leaders were in hiding. Mary Skipper knows she will not get political cover from the Council.
The evidence from books like 'Neighborhood Defenders' and a large number of public surveys on new housing construction shows that it isn't that people change their mind when a project is close to them, but rather that the minority in opposition is much louder and better organized than the supportive but passive majority.
Based on the questions and comments from Councilors there is a lot of support for a much bolder set of actions than what was laid out here: Council President Ruthzee Louijeune's right-sizing questions, Councilor Worrell's comments about what he would like to see from BPS, Councilor Breadon's criticism of the plan, and Councilor Fernandes Anderson's focus on getting a new plan for the O'Bryant by the end of this school year. In addition to the Councilors, it is clear that the School Committee, including Chair Jeri Robinson, wanted to see a more ambitious plan.
Show me affirmative Councilor reaction to any proposed closing over the past few years. They run and hide with any outcry (no matter how limited the posse). I give Skipper and Wu credit for the O'Bryant relo proposal. Made a ton of sense (create a better Madison Park, make use of existing empty building, solve exam school issue for West Roxbury now that they're locked out of BLS, etc). But they'll never touch a hot stove again.
That is an interesting analysis - the point about the lack of get up and go from School Committee members and City Councilors is certainly valid. Looking at the pressure that created the proposals and the run-up to their announcements makes the differences between the O'Bryant proposal roll-out last summer and the run up to this long-term facilities plan look really different in ways that argue against your analysis however.
The O'Bryant proposal was announced without much public before hand discussion and was not required by any outside body. The long-term facilities plan was part of the June 2022 agreement between the City and State that prevented a state takeover of Boston Public Schools, with a hard deadline of Dec 31, 2023. The long-term facilities plan also had a lot of before hand discussion, with a lot of public discussion of the district's issues and how they might be fixed - the opposite of the run-up to the O'Bryant proposal.
Finally, there are now multiple public polls - from BPI and from MassINC Polling Group - that show there is wide spread support among parents and the public to replace small, aging public schools with new, larger ones. That sort of public polling did not exist for O'Bryant, and the fact that its existence didn't encourage the City to take a bolder approach is hopefully something that future reporting on this issue sheds more light on.
Excellent round-up. Would be amazing to replicate this kind of coverage of other Massachusetts cities/towns (i.e. Brockton, MA) - though I realize this work is resource intensive and this is the "Boston" Policy Institute :)
Thank you so much for the kind words! Legislata, the civic tech start-up that produces and hosts BPI's AI-generated transcript feeds also provides the service for a small fee to other communities, and even does AI-generated summaries of meetings. While what BPI does is quite intensive, having a less ambitious effort that is just aimed at the public meetings for a City like Brockton seems doable - Brockton has a number of pretty active FB groups that could pitch in!
I agree with your distinction.
Polls showing 60% of residents are for new big schools are like polls showing residents are for residential growth. Until it comes to their backyard the polls are irrelevant. Look at the public outcry when a very sound plan to relocate the O'Bryant was proposed. Electeds ran away. What about a very sound plan to turn around Charlestown High two years ago? A tiny outcry and political leaders were in hiding. Mary Skipper knows she will not get political cover from the Council.
The evidence from books like 'Neighborhood Defenders' and a large number of public surveys on new housing construction shows that it isn't that people change their mind when a project is close to them, but rather that the minority in opposition is much louder and better organized than the supportive but passive majority.
Based on the questions and comments from Councilors there is a lot of support for a much bolder set of actions than what was laid out here: Council President Ruthzee Louijeune's right-sizing questions, Councilor Worrell's comments about what he would like to see from BPS, Councilor Breadon's criticism of the plan, and Councilor Fernandes Anderson's focus on getting a new plan for the O'Bryant by the end of this school year. In addition to the Councilors, it is clear that the School Committee, including Chair Jeri Robinson, wanted to see a more ambitious plan.
Show me affirmative Councilor reaction to any proposed closing over the past few years. They run and hide with any outcry (no matter how limited the posse). I give Skipper and Wu credit for the O'Bryant relo proposal. Made a ton of sense (create a better Madison Park, make use of existing empty building, solve exam school issue for West Roxbury now that they're locked out of BLS, etc). But they'll never touch a hot stove again.
That is an interesting analysis - the point about the lack of get up and go from School Committee members and City Councilors is certainly valid. Looking at the pressure that created the proposals and the run-up to their announcements makes the differences between the O'Bryant proposal roll-out last summer and the run up to this long-term facilities plan look really different in ways that argue against your analysis however.
The O'Bryant proposal was announced without much public before hand discussion and was not required by any outside body. The long-term facilities plan was part of the June 2022 agreement between the City and State that prevented a state takeover of Boston Public Schools, with a hard deadline of Dec 31, 2023. The long-term facilities plan also had a lot of before hand discussion, with a lot of public discussion of the district's issues and how they might be fixed - the opposite of the run-up to the O'Bryant proposal.
Finally, there are now multiple public polls - from BPI and from MassINC Polling Group - that show there is wide spread support among parents and the public to replace small, aging public schools with new, larger ones. That sort of public polling did not exist for O'Bryant, and the fact that its existence didn't encourage the City to take a bolder approach is hopefully something that future reporting on this issue sheds more light on.
Excellent round-up. Would be amazing to replicate this kind of coverage of other Massachusetts cities/towns (i.e. Brockton, MA) - though I realize this work is resource intensive and this is the "Boston" Policy Institute :)
Thank you so much for the kind words! Legislata, the civic tech start-up that produces and hosts BPI's AI-generated transcript feeds also provides the service for a small fee to other communities, and even does AI-generated summaries of meetings. While what BPI does is quite intensive, having a less ambitious effort that is just aimed at the public meetings for a City like Brockton seems doable - Brockton has a number of pretty active FB groups that could pitch in!