Who Decides the Fate of Bruce Monroe Elementary School?

Have you ever heard the phrase, “if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu?”  The Parents and Friends of Bruce Monroe Elementary School thought they were at the table when former School Chancellor Michelle Rhee and soon to be former Mayor Adrian Fenty promised that the school would be rebuilt by the fall of 2011.  They sent their children off to Parkview Elementary School on Warder Street NW, out of the site of hungry developers and the passing traffic that helps keeps crime on Georgia Avenue at bay.

While test scores dropped and rodents infested the cafeteria, the $20.3 million allegedly put aside to help rebuild the school seemingly disappeared.  The city did manage to come up with $2 million to construct an interim-use park on the site, so as not to remind the community that they don’t have the school they were promised.   The first request for proposals that the city put out didn’t garner any serious takers now that Georgia Avenue doesn’t look like the developers dream that it was before the recession.  And the latest RFP requires that developers submit two proposals, one for a school with commercial elements and one for commercial development only.  No school included.  Our presumptive mayor Vincent Gray has gone from saying that the promise made to the Bruce Monroe parents was a “cruel joke,” to “we can only afford one school,” meaning either Bruce Monroe or Parkview.

On August 10th, when the city planned to present this new RFP to developers, the Parents and Friends of Bruce Monroe Elementary School, were not invited to the table, as is blatantly clear in the video posted above.   But being unwilling to be eaten alive, they showed up in force anyway.

Having community members show up at a meeting that was clearly meant for developers only may help to keep the Bruce Monroe site in the hands of the city’s residents.  The Parents and Friends of Bruce Monroe Elementary School are scheduled to meet with Mayor Elect Gray, Ward One Councilmember Jim Graham and Council Chair Kwame Brown on Tuesday November 16.  At the Ward One Town Hall meeting, Vince Gray expressed his appreciation for the activism of the Bruce Monroe community and claimed to be an activist himself.  Next week will tell us whether he’s also willing to give them a meaningful position at the negotiating table.

To get involved in the Campaign to Rebuild Bruce Monroe, contact Empower DC’s education organizer Daniel Del Pialago at Daniel@empowerdc.org.

9 comments to Who Decides the Fate of Bruce Monroe Elementary School?

  • Kent

    While this video is generally well made, there are inaccuracies in it. (including the overall cost of the park and that the meeting with Graham & Rhee resulted in a promise of $21M for a new school building — I was at that meeting too). This video is clearly pro-Bruce-Monroe and doesn’t attempt to include other community points-of-view.

    There are many in the community, including parents of school children, that support staying at the historic Park View school. Yes, it needs to be modernized, but it isn’t the horrible rat infested building described in the video. Likewise, the image of Park View behind scaffolding shows work that was done BEFORE the Bruce Monroe school relocated there.

    Yes, its old. Yes, it needs work. But that doesn’t mean that it can’t fulfill the promise of providing a quality facility for excellent education.

    If we are going to have an honest conversation about the future of Park View’s educational needs, then ALL community stakeholders need to be a part of that conversation.

  • Liane

    Hello Kent,

    Thank you for your comment. I agree with most of what you say here, but do take issue with a couple of points. I got my information about the cost of the park from Greater Greater Washington. Here’s the link – http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post.cgi?id=6308.
    There are several sources for the $20 million set aside for rebuilding Bruce Monroe, including Sylvia Robinson from the Georgia Avenue Community Task Force, featured in the video. I suggest that you do a Google search of Bruce Monroe and $20 million and check those sources for inaccuracies as well. I’ve also been told by parents involved in the meetings with Rhee and Graham that there were in fact several meetings. Is it possible that they didn’t promise the $20 million at the meeting you went to, but did at others?

    Thank you for saying the video is well-made, a lot of effort was in fact put into it. It is pro-Bruce Monroe. There are attempts to get the position of the developers at the meeting, who I believe are on the other side, but as you can see from the hands in the camera, they weren’t really interested in laying out their positions. Which is yet another reason I appreciate your comments here. I believe this issue really warrants a full public hearing.

    What I’ve heard first hand from parents and students is that they were promised a new Bruce Monroe on the same sight. I simply don’t understand why its okay for our elected officials to renege on the promises they make to their constituents. That’s why the video and accompanying article are pro-Bruce Monroe. Although it is pro-Bruce Monroe, I believe it is also fair and as balanced as I could manage.

    As for the shot of Park View with the scaffolding, you have me dead to rights there. It’s manipulative. I wish I’d had time to include in the video how the parents had raised I believe it was $1 million dollars (but I’d have to source that) to have a new library put into Bruce Monroe before it was torn down. That library and other renovations which the community worked really hard to raise the money for, wasn’t in place for a year before the city tore the school down. The community only agreed because the city promised they’d build another. So, I’m sorry I didn’t get that in there, and that’s probably why I went with the old shot of Park View. But if you’re interested in the renovation story, listen to the post on this blog Disgruntled Parents Confront City Council. Here’s the link – http://www.grassrootsmediaproject.org/2010/06/disgruntled-parents-confront-city-council/

    And one last thing (sorry for the length) I believe if you look it up, you’ll find that the exterminators were called in three times last January alone because they had found droppings in the cafeteria food supply. I do sincerely hope that’s better.

    Again, as a representative of the other side on this issue, I appreciate your comments. I hope that you will let us know what your relationship is with Bruce Monroe or the surrounding community. Thanks again.

  • Kent Boese

    Liane–

    You want to know my credentials and connection to the school issue. Fair enough. For the past year, I’ve been president of the Park View United Neighborhood Coalition. I am also the commissioner-elect for ANC 1A08, the single member district in which the Park View School is located. I am also the author of the article on Greater Greater Washington that you referred me to. You will note in the article I said that the park got an additional $1.5M. That was in addition to the original $500,000 dedicated to the site, making a total of $2M. As you can see, I’ve been following this issue most closely.

    I have also been a member of the Georgia Avenue Community Development Task Force since its founding. I am well aware of the information that’s been shared at those meetings and am an active participant. So yes, I do know Sylvia Robinson and have been working with her for some time.

    The meeting that Sylvia Robinson is referring too included myself, Darren Jones of the Pleasant Plains Civic Association, parents and teachers of the “Bruce Monroe school community,” as well as Graham and Rhee. While I had been aware of the $21M reserved for the school prior to the meeting, this was the first meeting where the amount was publicly disclosed (to my knowledge). It was mentioned in such a way that it could have been interpreted to either support building a new school, or modernizing the Park View School. I think everyone at that meeting heard what they wanted to hear. As a supporter of a modernized Park View, I listen very carefully to what is said and take notes to see if statements and commitments are contrary to a renovated Park View. The meeting with Graham and Rhee was non-committal on the issue of rebuilding a school beyond mentioning the public-private RFP that would be issued that could lead to a new school building.

    I think its important to be crystal clear that when folks talk about the Bruce Monroe community, they are speaking of the community that existed before the Bruce Monroe and Park View schools were combined. Even though Park View currently has one school, it still serves two communities with two points of view. I represent a lot of parents that strongly identify with Park View. I even have residents tell me, with pride, that their grandchild is a third generation student at Park View.

    I do understand the frustration of parents who want a new school built. I agree that the city has not handled this issue as well as they could have.

  • Hello Again Kent,

    Thank you for the information. Perhaps you could clarify a couple of points. How much did the interim park actually cost? You said in your first post that my figure of $2 million, which I got from your post on Greater Greater Washington, was inaccurate. Is the figure correct, but the source of the funding incorrect? Did the 1.5 million that Jim Graham came up with come from a source other than city coffers? And if you know that source or sources I’d love to know them. In the interest of clarity, I think this would be good to know.

    Although, I referred to Sylvia Robinson as a source for the $21 million set aside for Bruce Monroe, she is certainly not the only source. It may be true that in the meeting that you referred to, Jim Graham, Michelle Rhee and Adrian Fenty might not have made that commitment, but is it possible, as I asked in my first response, that this promise was made in other meetings? That is the information that I’ve gotten from Bruce Monroe parents. They did not refer to a specific meeting when they stated this, they referred to several meetings. In the interest of clarity, it can’t be useful to pretend that only one meeting took place.

    As a party who is following this issue closely, I’d love to get your feedback regarding the other Bruce Monroe post on this blog. Here again is the link – http://www.grassrootsmediaproject.org/2010/06/disgruntled-parents-confront-city-council/. Thanks for your comments. -Liane

  • Kent Boese

    Liane–

    Yes, I’m sure there were many meetings with parents of the old Bruce-Monroe, where lots of things were stated over time. I see that in your post you correctly state the park cost $2M. My statement that the amount was stated incorrectly goes to the content of the video, which incorrectly states the park cost $1.5M. When all is finished as planned at the park, the reality will be that the park could end up being more than $2M. There is still a building planned for the site.

    I’m also not debating the $21M for the future of Bruce-Monroe … but I am debating that it was explicitly stated it was for a new school building. The future of Bruce Monroe could be a modernized Park View. This is where the exact words that city representatives used needs to be known.

    You have yet to address my issue of two communities with different goals being served by one school. What would your win/win solution be?

  • Kent-
    So, I tracked down the minutes to a meeting that the Parents and Friends of Bruce Monroe had with Jim Graham and Chancellor Rhee on Tuesday, April 06, 2010. These are not exact words, but I think the notes of a meeting that all attendees have privy to should clarify any intentions.

    “In this meeting, Chancellor Rhee confirmed her commitment to rebuild the school under a Public/Private partnership. She stated that this was the only and original commitment to the condition of rebuilding the school because the school system doesn’t have the financial resources to build a brand new school. She stated that there are 20 million dollars in the DCPS and OPEFM budget to be included in an RFP to solicit private investors.”

    “After the meeting Council Member Graham affirmed his commitment to rebuild the school despite the parents feeling that the school will not be built.”

    So all of that seems pretty clear. If anyone wants a copy of those minutes let me know and I’ll post them here. I’m just a little pressed for time at the moment. So as far as the win/win for two communities, well the answer is obvious, two schools. I believe the school “right-sizing” was implemented to hand over choice properties to developers, which is why Bruce Monroe was initially put on the list even though it was younger than Park View, was out-performing Park View academically, had a larger school population than Park View and a more active parent community working to improve it than Park View. It should never have been put on the “right-sizing” list. We’d all win if our public officials admitted that they made a mistake and worked to fulfill the promises that have already been made to the community. Thanks to the recession, that property isn’t as choice as it once was. If you want to build up property values in the neighborhood, then your number one priority should be quality schools. Not a quality school, quality schools.

  • […] this year, bulldozers knocked down Bruce-Monroe Elementary school in the Petworth neighborhood of Washington D.C. with the promise from the city’s leaders that […]

  • […] Public schools especially in neighborhoods that are at risk of gentrification.  Ask the parents of Bruce Monroe or River Terrace Elementary Schools.    Why might this happen in communities that have already […]

  • […] again, community members are shut out of the process leading up to the closing of a school.  (See Bruce Monroe Elementary School & River Terrace Elementary […]