Slog
News & ArtsMonday, June 6, 2011
Education / City / Media False Assumption Underlies Press Coverage of School Sale Controversy
Posted by Goldy on Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:11 PM
As Riya reports below, there's a controversy brewing over the sale of the former Martin Luther King Elementary School to the First AME Church, and while I wholeheartedly support investigating the deal—especially considering the prior scandals of the Maria Goodloe-Johnson administration—I've got to take issue with the underlying assumption presented in most news reports, as typified in today's lede in the Seattle Times:
When an affluent private school in Madison Valley offered to pay as much as $9.7 million for an empty public school in 2009, the choice for the cash-strapped Seattle school district seemed obvious: Sign the papers.
But what could have been a straightforward real-estate deal turned into an elaborate chess game that ended with a well-connected church buying the closed Martin Luther King Elementary School with $2.4 million in taxpayer dollars.
First of all that's not an apples to apples comparison. The Bush School actually offered to purchase the property for $3.75 million. The $9.7 million figure would have been for a longterm lease, paid out to the district over decades. Still, $3.75 million is more than $2.4 million.
And that seems to be the gist of almost all the reporting I've seen. The Bush School's bid was substantially higher, yet the district went out of its way to accept the lower First AME bid. Instant scandal. Which brings us to the bigger question: Why is it so "obvious" that the district should accept the highest bid?
The primary mission of the Seattle Public Schools is to educate children, no question about that, but historically, schools also play a much larger role in their communities. Anybody who witnessed the anger and passion displayed during the past two rounds of school closures understands how a neighborhood school is much more than just a building with classrooms. MLK Jr. Elementary was part of the community, and the district needed to be cognizant of this role in determining how to dispose of the property. The school district is not a real estate development firm, and while it certainly needs to be a responsible steward of taxpayer money, it is not in the business of maximizing returns on real estate holdings. Money certainly needed to be part of the equation, but it would be wrong to assert that price should have been the only factor in making this decision.
Perhaps the higher bid from the exclusive Bush School, along with its promise to keep the play fields open to the public on weekends would have been the best option for the community. Perhaps the investigation will ultimately uncover something improper about the First AME deal. I don't know. But there's nothing scandalous in itself about taking less money for the property in the interest of best serving the needs of the surrounding neighborhood.
2
It's also kind of weird that they referred to a church as "well-connected" in contrast with the Bush School.
4
Btw Goldy, how come u have no problem with taxpayer's money being given to the church to help further screw students in SPS schools? Why do liberals ALWAYS give black churches a pass on church/state issues?
6
It's obvious that we should use eminent domain powers to take control of the property that Bush School owns and use it for its Best Use as Movie Studios.
I recommend we pay them 10 cents on the dollar.
I recommend we pay them 10 cents on the dollar.
7
Is it not true that the Bush school offer was its own money, as opposed to taxpayer money?
Or is that not apples and oranges, too?
Or is that not apples and oranges, too?
8
Goldy conveniently forgot that there was a third player, the community that tried to make a bid and even tried with the help of senator kline to work with the church and they refused . The church lied and said that they had a partnership with the city and the city denied that. School district officials didn't scrutinize them while scrutinizing the other bids. I hate to say this but this is a poor post and the Times article is much better than Goldy posts here. Too bad I'm usually a fan of Goldys Seattle times post but here he is just being lazy
9
I can't believe I seriously just read this. Of course the school should take more money, if for no other reason than to have more money to not close schools or to pay for more teachers or whatever else.
What the fuck is your problem?
What the fuck is your problem?
10
Forget about Bush, the school district also picked AME over the CCC@MLK, a grass roots nonprofit organization made up of people who actually live in the surrounding neighborhood. And they did this after showing AME the CCC@MLK's bid so they could copy ideas from it.
Try reading the entire article, Goldy.
Try reading the entire article, Goldy.
12
And BTW, it is totally fucking wrong for the Seattle School District to be making charitable donations to a fucking church using funds/property that was given to them by tax payers for the purpose of public education.
13
@12 I think Moldy's point here is this is black people so we have to hold them to a different and lower standard. It's called '$ocial Ju$tice'.
14
@13: There are valid criticisms of decisions in the name of "social justice", and there are the ignorable criticisms made by angry conservatives who make equally stupid decisions in the name of "god" and "lower taxes" and such.
Sign in, or we'll all just assume you are in the latter category.
Sign in, or we'll all just assume you are in the latter category.
15
3,750,000 - 2,400,000 = 1,350,000, or 27 $50,000/year teacher salaries.
per the article, the AME has had it for 2 years now and only has Head Start in the building. either they overpromised or they're fuckups. probably both.
open playfields WOULD BE A DIRECT COMMUNITY BENEFIT.
per the article, the AME has had it for 2 years now and only has Head Start in the building. either they overpromised or they're fuckups. probably both.
open playfields WOULD BE A DIRECT COMMUNITY BENEFIT.
16
seandr @10,
Try reading my entire post. Where did I specifically defend the MLK deal? Where did I dismiss the notion that another deal might have been better?
All I did was point out that the assumption that price should have been the only consideration was ridiculous. In fact I leave myself perfectly open to the possibility that something improper happened.
Geez... folks sure do like to read between the lines.
Try reading my entire post. Where did I specifically defend the MLK deal? Where did I dismiss the notion that another deal might have been better?
All I did was point out that the assumption that price should have been the only consideration was ridiculous. In fact I leave myself perfectly open to the possibility that something improper happened.
Geez... folks sure do like to read between the lines.
18
Goldy simply refuses to acknowledge that AME got the property because of race and politics. Had this deal gone to Mars Church he'd be throwing (rightfully) a shit fit. but being a racist, he holds blacks to a lower standard.
19
@16: Fair enough, although I find it odd that this is how you chose to respond to this situation. It's kind of like responding to the Kyle Huff massacre by pointing out that shooting a person can in some cases be justified.
And besides, your point is wrong for the reason I mentioned @14.
And besides, your point is wrong for the reason I mentioned @14.
20
First of all AME did not pay $2.4 milion. They paid nothing. The taxpayers footed the bill.
The School District official who brokered this deal, Fred Stephens was a member of the AME and told his church beforehand he would make sure they got it. Absolutely illegal for him to use his paid position on the school board to discriminate against bidders in situations like this.
Also, the idea the AME serves "the community"... that is a euphamism for "black folks". Uh, sorry Goldy but a huge disproportinate amount of public funds already go to social programs that predominately serve African Americas. Ditto for Section 8 housing.
It is pure discrimination that they gave this away to a Black Church and this is supposed to benefit everyone. If they had sold it to Bush at least the revenue would have benefitted all citizens.
Let's see the city take saleable property and donate it to Mosques, Synagogues, and Mormon groups too. The outrage would be sky high. But blacks play the "underpriveledged and underserved" card to get away with this. And it's bs.
The School District official who brokered this deal, Fred Stephens was a member of the AME and told his church beforehand he would make sure they got it. Absolutely illegal for him to use his paid position on the school board to discriminate against bidders in situations like this.
Also, the idea the AME serves "the community"... that is a euphamism for "black folks". Uh, sorry Goldy but a huge disproportinate amount of public funds already go to social programs that predominately serve African Americas. Ditto for Section 8 housing.
It is pure discrimination that they gave this away to a Black Church and this is supposed to benefit everyone. If they had sold it to Bush at least the revenue would have benefitted all citizens.
Let's see the city take saleable property and donate it to Mosques, Synagogues, and Mormon groups too. The outrage would be sky high. But blacks play the "underpriveledged and underserved" card to get away with this. And it's bs.
21
If the school board gives away valuable property to the "Black Church" they need to give away property to the "Arab Mosque", "European Synagogue", "Asian Buddhist temple" and "Indian HIndu Temple" too
22
Since AME used tax payer funds and they aren't really using the property, can we take the school back? Sell it to Bush or let an non-religious community organization lease it. I have no problem with selling or leasing the property below market rates or using public funds - as long as there are actual community benefits. This deal was just cronyism.
AME also has the parking lots around their church -14th between Pike and Pine- on the market or in development. Planning to sell the block at the market rate and move the church to the tax payer subsidized building?
AME also has the parking lots around their church -14th between Pike and Pine- on the market or in development. Planning to sell the block at the market rate and move the church to the tax payer subsidized building?
23
"False Assumption Underlies Press Coverage of School Sale Controversy"
Not at all, you are grasping at straws. The disctrict received several good offers for the space but gave it away, at taxpayer expense, to an African Methodist Church which was pushed by a powerful member of the district who had been affiliated with the church for a few generations. A better question is, why are you trying to sugercoat it?
Not at all, you are grasping at straws. The disctrict received several good offers for the space but gave it away, at taxpayer expense, to an African Methodist Church which was pushed by a powerful member of the district who had been affiliated with the church for a few generations. A better question is, why are you trying to sugercoat it?
24
On second thought - the church is likely waiting for charter schools to be permitted and won't do anything else with the structure until then. Of course that wasn't in its community plan.
26
I just read the article in the times and it was very clear about the different amount bush would have paid. The larger amount was for a lease and the smaller was for an outright sale.
This is a terrible post guilty of far worse distortion than the article it complains about. If you want to know what the fuck goldy is talking about, read the times article.
This is a terrible post guilty of far worse distortion than the article it complains about. If you want to know what the fuck goldy is talking about, read the times article.
27
This community needs better funded public education, not parochial schools or exclusive private schools. If the MLK building can't be used directly for public education, the priority on selling the space should be recouping as much money as possible for the public school system.
Funding a church with taxpayer money is hardly beneficial enough to the entire community that it justifies selling at such a low price. At least Bush claims it would use the space to admit more non-rich students. How many non-AME Methodists benefit from their use of the space?
Funding a church with taxpayer money is hardly beneficial enough to the entire community that it justifies selling at such a low price. At least Bush claims it would use the space to admit more non-rich students. How many non-AME Methodists benefit from their use of the space?
28
Look, if this deal went to mars church, Moldy would be throwing a fit. He simply thinks black people deserve a lower standard to whites because he doesn't think they are equally capable. It's the soft bigotry of low expectations.
29
Remember, when the State Auditor starts asking tough questions about the sweetheart deal and you need some serious deflection, RAAAAACISM has _5_ "a"s in it.
31
Ah, yes. Another Seattle pundit weighing in on Seattle education. Why is it that everyone in this town feels they know everything there is to know? The KUOW gang of three (including Eli), Goldy, c'mon, isn't there something you don't know?
I served on the Closure and Consolidation committee and people weighed in two ways on the sale of school buildings.
One, sell it for the highest price.
Two, make it affordable for neighborhood uses.
First AME's plan was neither. It's clear that the fix was in and I'm sure Fred Stephens and Maria Goodloe-Johnson are at the heart of it. That might eventually come out.
No, there is nothing "scandalous" about taking less money but when it's the taxpayers money for a poorly thought out plan, yes, it's a problem.
I served on the Closure and Consolidation committee and people weighed in two ways on the sale of school buildings.
One, sell it for the highest price.
Two, make it affordable for neighborhood uses.
First AME's plan was neither. It's clear that the fix was in and I'm sure Fred Stephens and Maria Goodloe-Johnson are at the heart of it. That might eventually come out.
No, there is nothing "scandalous" about taking less money but when it's the taxpayers money for a poorly thought out plan, yes, it's a problem.
32
@2
First AME IS a well-connected church; lots of politically powerful people attend that church. Former Seattle mayors, county execs, etc.
First AME IS a well-connected church; lots of politically powerful people attend that church. Former Seattle mayors, county execs, etc.
34
Having twice subjected this piece to a close reading, I've concluded that one of two things is true (and don't tell me this is a false choice; it's not).
1. I am missing something big.
2. Goldy is advancing a thesis so manifestly blockheaded that he threatens to do to policy what Mr. Mudede threatens to do to philosophy in some of his more comically oracular posts: namely, to bring the entire discipline into complete fucking disrepute.
To begin at the beginning: at no place in this tortured argument does Goldy deny that 2.4 million dollars in taxpayer money was used to finance the purchase of the property by a fucking church. I suspect that if we were talking about giving this money to Mars Hill, the very author of this piece would be invoking the establishment clause, which is precisely what he should be doing here.
Second, we're not discussing the difference between 3.75 million dollars and 2.4 million. We're talking about the difference between a 3.75 million GAIN to taxpayers and a 2.4 million LOSS to taxpayers. So combine the unrealized gain of 3.75 million and the actual loss of 2.4 million, and you arrive at a total loss of 6.15 million to benefit a party who had connections to the benefited institution. If you're going to blunt Occam's razor to argue that there could be an innocent explanation for all this, you'd think you'd advance an example of what such an innocent explanation might look like.
Right?
1. I am missing something big.
2. Goldy is advancing a thesis so manifestly blockheaded that he threatens to do to policy what Mr. Mudede threatens to do to philosophy in some of his more comically oracular posts: namely, to bring the entire discipline into complete fucking disrepute.
To begin at the beginning: at no place in this tortured argument does Goldy deny that 2.4 million dollars in taxpayer money was used to finance the purchase of the property by a fucking church. I suspect that if we were talking about giving this money to Mars Hill, the very author of this piece would be invoking the establishment clause, which is precisely what he should be doing here.
Second, we're not discussing the difference between 3.75 million dollars and 2.4 million. We're talking about the difference between a 3.75 million GAIN to taxpayers and a 2.4 million LOSS to taxpayers. So combine the unrealized gain of 3.75 million and the actual loss of 2.4 million, and you arrive at a total loss of 6.15 million to benefit a party who had connections to the benefited institution. If you're going to blunt Occam's razor to argue that there could be an innocent explanation for all this, you'd think you'd advance an example of what such an innocent explanation might look like.
Right?
35
@34,
No, I have a simple thesis: that there's nothing inherently scandalous about selecting the low bid when it comes to how to repurpose a neighborhood school. Everything else is just stuff you and the rest of the readers have chosen to read into this post.
No, I have a simple thesis: that there's nothing inherently scandalous about selecting the low bid when it comes to how to repurpose a neighborhood school. Everything else is just stuff you and the rest of the readers have chosen to read into this post.
37
"Anybody who witnessed the anger and passion displayed during the past two rounds of school closures understands how a neighborhood school is much more than just a building with classrooms. MLK Jr. Elementary was part of the community, and the district needed to be cognizant of this role in determining how to dispose of the property."
*snicker*
They could have realized greater revenue, been better stewards of public money, and sold the property to...........wait for it.......A SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (yes a private school)
Schools are important parts of our community, so why not "win-win"
What a joke Goldstein...
*snicker*
They could have realized greater revenue, been better stewards of public money, and sold the property to...........wait for it.......A SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (yes a private school)
Schools are important parts of our community, so why not "win-win"
What a joke Goldstein...
38
"Anybody who witnessed the anger and passion displayed during the past two rounds of school closures understands how a neighborhood school is much more than just a building with classrooms. MLK Jr. Elementary was part of the community, and the district needed to be cognizant of this role in determining how to dispose of the property."
*snicker*
I'm not sure what's funnier, Goldy defending the sale of a school to a **GASP** Christian church, or that the highest bidder is a school.
They could have realized greater revenue, been better stewards of public money, and sold the property to...........wait for it.......A SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (yes a private school)
Schools are important parts of our community, so why not "win-win"
This town is the essencse of "culture of corruption"
*snicker*
I'm not sure what's funnier, Goldy defending the sale of a school to a **GASP** Christian church, or that the highest bidder is a school.
They could have realized greater revenue, been better stewards of public money, and sold the property to...........wait for it.......A SCHOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (yes a private school)
Schools are important parts of our community, so why not "win-win"
This town is the essencse of "culture of corruption"
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY) Says Members of His Party Have Rocks for Brains by Charles Mudede
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (38) RSS