Slay to St. Louis Public Schools: Suburbs are your real competition
Eddie Roth/Post-Dispatch
Mayor Francis Slay was in to see us yesterday, the first of the three candidates in the Democratic primary for Mayor to talk with us (Irene Smith is coming in this morning. Denise Watson Wesley Coleman is expected Wednesday morning.)
During the interview, Mayor Slay gave high marks to St. Louis Public Schools Superintendent Kelvin Adams, and also had nice things to say about the Special Administrative Board’s having brought basic stability to district operations.
But Mr. Slay took issue with the SAB’s decision to impose deed restrictions on closed schools, which prevents them from being reused as schools for 100 years, disputing the central premise for the SAB’s action: that the restrictive covenants protect a district that already is losing students at a fast rate from further loses to charter schools that seek to occupy former St. Louis Public School buildings.
(Read our editorial on the issue here).
Mr. Slay argued that suburban schools are the main draw for families dissatisfied with city schools — and St. Louis Public School buildings not being used by the district should be seen as assets for keeping families in the city and building up St. Louis public education, whether in the form of traditional schools or charters.
Eddie Roth writes about education, social justice, public safety, transportation, legal affairs and historic preservation. He joined the Post-Dispatch editorial page in 2008 after six years as an editorial writer with the Dayton Daily News. But he is not new to St. Louis. Eddie grew up in Webster Groves and south St. Louis County. He's a lawyer who for many years practiced with a downtown firm, and was active in civic affairs, including serving a term on the St. Louis Police Board. He and his wife, Jeanne, and their three daughters, Emily, Julia and Alice, live in the Shaw Neighborhood.
When it comes to community organizing, he endorses Quentin Crisp's advice: Rather than keeping up with the Joneses, it's better to pull them down to your level. 
The Public School system is terrified of charter schools because of their good and successful track record. Slay may be right that suburban schools are the main competition (I have no numbers to back up or attack that position so I can’t say for sure), but charters are definitely part of the reason. That an organization responsible for education would purposefully keep other educational institutions from using those buildings shows you where education ranks on their priority list…
Dr. Adams had a very welcome thing to say about charter schools, buried in a Suburban Journal article:
http://www.mayorslay.com/desk/display.asp?deskID=1196
East Berlin : the wall :: SLPS : restrictive covenants.
That said, however, the record of charter schools is mixed at best. Two words: CAN! Academy.
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/the-grade/charter-schools/2008/12/can-academy-wont-reopen-charter-school-in-st-louis/
Mayor Slay is right to say that suburban schools are the top competition for city schools. People vote with their feet, and the city suffers. But in a way, that’s beside the point: If the vacant schools were bought by private, parochial, or charter school operators, and succeeded in providing a quality education for some students currently trapped in the SLPS, why would that be a bad thing? It is a perverse view that would rather trap children in failing schools than give them other opportunities.
Furthermore, have the good folks at the SAB thought about the impact these restrictive covenants could have on the neighborhoods? It is a horrible blow to a neighborhood when its public school is closed. To prohibit the most obvious reuse of the building for the next century makes it far more likely that the school will become a boarded up, useless shell, and drag the neighborhood down with it. What is the point of that?
Charters have an excellent track record? What data supports this? I know, however, that charters often fail around the country, and the ones that do operate are horrible. (CAN! Academy again) Tell me this, if and when the economy gets worse, what will those charters that use up these buildings do? They will close, tossing their students into the streets, just like they are currently doing. And what will we be left with? Public schools with no buildings to support the rising number of students who wish to attend.
Also, charter schools harm private and parochial schools, Nick. I campaigned for Robin Wright-Jones over the summer, and I talked to A LOT of parents who were very let down with what kind of education their kids were getting at a charter, and were trying to enroll them in a magnet school. Because once parents realize what a farce they are, they will take their children out, right? And they will move to the county, right? Not those mythologically terrible public schools. Oh no, never. Never mind that they probably have never set foot in a SLPS building. So where does that leave the private and parochial schools in the city? Less families, less students. It’s a vicious cycle, isn’t it?
The good folks at the SAB? You were obviously not at the meeting over the summer where Richard Gaines repeatedly referenced the children in SLPS as “these damn kids”. Please, if you want to talk about issues in the city, at least make an effort to get more experience than what the Post-Dispatch allows you to hear. It is quite enriching.
Wow, someone posting under the same name as Slay’s public relations firm agrees with Slay. I guess that settles matters. BTW, the firm, Public Eye, is run by this guy: http://www.stlmag.com/media/St-Louis-Magazine/August-2006/More-Than-Meets-The-Eye/ .