FRANKLIN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

REDISTRICTING PROJECT

PROJECT SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

5/8/02

 

 

 

Contents:

 

1. Redistricting Project Summary

 

a. Introduction

 

b. Project Team

 

c. Project Meeting Dates

 

d. Project Mission Statement

 

e. Project Principles

 

f.  Project Deliverables

 

g. Project Time Line

 

h. Project Resources

 

i.  Project Constraints

       

2. Elementary Option 11d

 

a. Option 11d Recommendation

 

b. How to read Option 11d Maps

 

c. Redistricting Option 11d Description and Enrollment Forecast

 

d. Option 11d Town-wide Map (North)

 

e. Option 11d Town-wide Map (South)

 

f.  Option 11d Davis-Thayer District Map

 

g. Option 11d, Jefferson District Map

 

h. Option 11d, JFK District Map

 

i.  Option 11d, Keller District Map

 

j.  Option 11d, Oak Street District Map

 

k. Option 11d, Parmenter District Map

 

1. Redistricting Project Summary

A. Introduction

The overall goal of the redistricting project is to contribute to the district’s goal of providing all Franklin Public Schools students with the best physical learning environment possible by uniform and equitable utilization of facilities according to the needs of the educational program.

Redistricting is a massive undertaking that will affect a great number employees, parents and students. Redistricting will effect all residents perhaps in very small ways and those residents who are our customers in very significant ways. Changing district boundary lines is accompanied by emotion and passion. This task is made more complex by accidents of geography, the locations of our schools, the street and neighborhood network that makes up the Franklin community and the geographic distribution of our students. Redistricting has a direct impact on school budgets, jobs and the education of every student. Redistricting is a daunting task.

Redistricting is also a very necessary task. The Town of Franklin has responded to the extraordinary growth of Franklin’s school age population by initiating a massive school construction project. Table 1 displays the addition of 361,850 square feet of school house space over the past 6 years in the Town of Franklin. The acquisition of portables in 1998, 1999 and 2000 simply kept pace with district growth. Enrollment growth has been averaging 5 percent per year. The new schools will accommodate present growth and permit overcrowded existing schools to recapture valuable specialized spaces such as library, computer lab, art and music spaces and important meeting and storage spaces.

 

Table 1
Franklin Public Schools
School House Expansion, 1998 - 2003

Year

Project

# of Classrooms

Square Feet

September 1998

Portable Classrooms

8

7,600

September 1999

Portable Classrooms

10

9,500

September 2000

Portable Classrooms

5

4,750

September 2002

Keller Elementary School Opening

 

85,000

September 2003

Sullivan Middle School Opening

 

85,000

September 2003

Horace Mann Middle School Reconstruction and Opening

 

85,000

September 2003

New Oak St School Opening

 

85,000

 

 

 

361,850

 

Redistricting is the altering of school district boundary lines to achieve the desired end of efficient, effective and equitable utilization of schoolhouse space and resources. Table 2 illustrates the present enrollment for each school as of October 1, 2001.

 

 

Table 2
Franklin Public Schools
Enrollment 10/1/01

School

Enrollment
10/1/01

Davis Thayer

411

Jefferson Elementary

670

Keller Elementary

0

J.F. Kennedy Elem.

568

Oak St. School

734

Parmenter School

556

Horace Mann MS

725

Remington MS

590

Sullivan MS

0

Franklin High School

1219

 

5473

 

The goal for the Redistricting Team is to change school district boundary lines in a way that follows the principles and practices of good school management and achieves enrollment targets established for each building in the best possible way. The objective for the Redistricting Team is to reduce enrollment at each existing school, open the Keller School and prepare for the relocation of Oak St. and finally redistrict the middle schools.

This document contains maps, statistical information and resources used by the team in reaching decisions with regard to redistricting. Using the materials contained in this manual and additional information and materials, the Team took the following work path:

 

B. Project Team Members

Name

Title

Dr. Warren

Superintendent

Dr. Ann Bergen

Principal

Barbara Brunelli

Parent

Dave Keniston

Business Manager

Mike Konosky

Principal

Corinne Minkel

Principal

Maureen Sabolinski

Special Education Dir.

Lisa Bassignani

Transportation Coord.

Roberta Trahan

Parent

 

C. Project Meeting Dates

Meeting

Date

Time

Place

Team

Jan. 4, 2002

9:00 AM

397 East Central St.

Team

Jan. 24, 2002

9:00 AM

397 East Central St.

Public Hearing

Jan. 28, 2002

7:30 AM

Jefferson

Public Hearing

Jan. 29, 2002

7:30 AM

Kennedy

Public Hearing

Jan. 31, 2002

9:30 AM

TriCounty Regional

Team

Mar. 22, 2002

9:00 AM

397 East Central St.

Public Meeting

April 2, 2002

7:00 PM

Jefferson

Public Meeting

April 4, 2002

7:00 PM

TriCounty Regional

Public Meeting

April 4, 2002

9:00 AM

Keller School

Team

April 25, 2002

9:00 am

397 East Central St.

School Committee

May 14

 

 

 

D. Project Mission Statement

To create a new school boundary plan that will, to the extent possible, further the district’s goal of providing the best physical learning environment possible by uniform and equitable utilization of facilities according to the needs of the educational program.

 

E. Project Principles

Every redistricting project must be guided by principles or rules. These rules are used to guide the district boundary designers in their decision-making and to provide equity in the redistricting product. The redistricting options reviewed by the Team were guided by the following project principles. These principles are presented in no particular order.

1.

The overall goal of the redistricting project must be to provide all students with the best physical learning environment possible by uniform and equitable utilization of facilities according to the needs of the educational program.

2.

Since the openings of Keller, Sullivan and Oak St. Elem. and HM MS will be phased over two years, particular attention must be paid as to how many times a student is moved. (Most will move once, HM will move twice.)

3.

An important objective should be class size equity across all buildings.

4.

The plan should result in efficient and appropriate use of space at all buildings with appropriate use of specialty rooms for art, music etc. and storage.

5.

District boundaries should be logical and bordered by natural boundaries (i.e. major streets, highways, railroad tracks, bridges etc.

6.

Natural walking paths to school should be preserved and used as a determinant for busing qualifications.

7.

Wherever possible, student’s who live within sight of one school should not be transported to another school. Student’s should not walk or be transported passed one school to reach his/her destination school.

8.

The redistricting product should maximize the use of walking paths to school.

9.

The redistricting product should promote the district’s overall class size goals.

10.

Residence, not child care arrangements, determine which elementary school a student will attend

11.

Boundaries must consider projected student population growth with the school boundary zone.

12.

Boundaries must consider the placement of special education programs.

13.

To the extent possible, boundaries should maintain the concept of geographic zoning, keeping geographically contiguous neighborhoods within one school district. Neighborhoods and condo and apartment complexes should all go to the same school.

14.

Boundaries should promote an efficient system of school bus transportation. School starting and ending times are important here.

15.

To the extent possible, feeder elementary schools should not be split as they feed the middle schools. However, this may be required to equalize enrollment numbers and to maximize the use of available space in the three middle schools.

16.

The redistricting plan should invite staff and community input, be widely published and accessible on the Internet and be professionally presented to the various school constituencies at scheduled meetings / forums.

17.

The boundary plan should anticipate future growth to the extent possible and be "built to last".

18.

The redistricting plan must be perceived to be equitable on its face. The plan must be simple and easily understood. There should be no lotteries or special classes of students or parents who are granted special waivers from following the redistricting plan. The Franklin Public Schools does not have the administrative staff or staff time to manage such a project.

19.

Once the plan is accepted, the plan should remain fixed until the next major redistricting project is undertaken. Once accepted, the boundary plan should be changed only in the case of the most grievous error or omission of the boundary designers.

20.

The redistricting outcome should strive to effect the fewest number of parents and students.

 

 

A Note on Redistricting Principles

The Team considered each of these principles as redistricting options were developed and boundary line changes were proposed. As the project progressed, we found that some of our guiding principles were contradictory or adverse to each other. For example, in our early boundary line models, we emphasized the "effect the fewest number of parents and students" principle. We found that this principle worked against promoting an "efficient system of school bus transportation" and "maximizing walking paths to school". We found it impossible to "impact the fewest number of students" and not create situations were students spent excessive time on the bus or passed one school to reach their destination school.

 

F. Project Work Products and Deliverables

The redistricting team project deliverables are as follows:

 

G. Project Time Line

The major milestones in the Franklin Public Schools redistricting project are as follows:

 

Date

Milestone

Week of

Jan. 27, 2002

Three Public Hearings are held to present several redistricting concepts and listen to public comment.

By Feb. 8,2002

Decisions will be made on new district boundaries. Boundaries are not announced until June 1, 2002. The work of changing staffing assignments begins.

Feb. 26, 2002

Horace Mann Middle School moves to the Sullivan Middle School intact and exists at Sullivan as the HM until 9/03

Apr.2,4, 2002

Three Public Meetings are held to present Option 11d

June 1, 2002

The redistricting plan is announced, staffing changes are published, student assignments are issued by letter.

June 30, 2002

ECDC relocates.

Aug. 25, 2002

The Keller Elementary School opens. Elementary redistricting is implemented. All district boundaries are effected. The Oak Street Elementary continues to exist at FHS with reduced enrollment. FHS gains needed space at Oak St., all elementary schools benefit from reduced enrollment and restored special use spaces such as art, music, library, computer and science labs. Storage and meeting spaces are restored.

Feb. 2003

The Oak St. School moves from FHS to the new Oak St. Elementary School. The HS gains complete access to A and D wings.

Aug. 25, 2003

Middle School redistricting is implemented. All MS district boundaries are effected creating a new Sullivan Middle School district. All middle schools benefit from reduced enrollment and restored special use spaces such as art, music, library, and computer and science labs. Storage and meeting spaces are restored.

Aug 25, 2003 or sooner

ECDC opens in new space designed for early childhood education and has room to grow.

 

H. Project Resources

 

People Resources

 

Project Team Members

 

Town Planning Department

 

Town Building Department

 

Town Clerk

 

Massachusetts Department of Education

 

Metropolitan Area Planning Council

 

NESDEC

 

Other Districts who have been through redistricting

 

 

 

Technical Resources

 

GIS Technology owned by the district

 

Presentation Technology owned by the district

 

NESDEC

 

U.S. Census Data

 

Outside consultants

 

I. Project Constraints

Time

School budget development for FY 2003 depends on completion of the redistricting plan. The plan must be reviewed, discussed and accepted as early as possible to have an impact on FY 2003 budget development.

Geography

As Team members review and discuss redistricting options, the constraints of the Town’s geography become apparent. Factors such as the Town’s natural barriers (Rte. 495, Rte. 140, Commuter Rail Line), the existing road network, the placement of schools and the distribution of student populations come into play. There can be no perfect redistricting plan that satisfies all of the principles of redistricting. The best plan will be an accommodation respecting the geography of the Town and the educational goals of the school district.

 

2. Elementary Option 11d

A. Option 11d Recommendation

 

B. How to Read the Option 11d Maps

The Option 11d maps feature several map layers. These layers include:

 

Students - Each dot represents one or more students at a known address. All student information comes from the district’s student information system as of 5/2/02. Large scale maps (District Maps), feature only one district. The student dots on these maps display three characters showing the pre-redistricting (9/01) school for that address.

 

Street Network - The source for the Franklin street network is "U.S. Streets". This is a street map maintained by the United States Government. Street names are provided. The last update to the map was the 2000 Census. Streets not included in the U.S. Streets map are added by hand by Franklin personnel.

 

Schools - School locations are indicated in bold, black type and have a school house symbol.

 

District Lines - Heavy blue lines indicate new district lines.

 

North/South Maps - The map of Franklin is printed in two sections to provide adequate resolution for the reader.

 

District Maps - Larger scale, individual district maps are also displayed.

 

The redistricting recommendation, Option 11d maps and supporting materials follow:

Redistricting Option 11d Enrollment Forecast and Analysis

Option 11 d features good balance at all schools. Total enrollments are below targets at all schools except Keller. Note enrollment is forecast to decline at Keller in 2003. Maximum effort was made to create a "school centric" boundary plan. This results in maximum use of walking paths to school and minimum time on the bus where transportation is required. Four in ten students are moved to a new school in Option 11d.

 

September 2002, Enrollment by Grade per Option 11d

Grd

DT

JEF

JFK

OAK

PAR

KEL

Total

K

56

101

86

95

57

76

471

1

62

99

90

79

78

95

503

2

64

105

95

96

91

100

551

3

50

82

94

84

73

89

472

4

58

83

89

96

59

98

483

5

43

91

84

88

75

92

473

Total

333

561

538

538

433

550

2953

Target

362

572

568

572

444

512

3030

Diff

-29

-11

-30

-34

-11

38

-77

 

September 2003, Enrollment by Grade per Option 11d

Grd

DT

JEF

JFK

OAK

PAR

KEL

Total

K

56

101

86

95

57

76

471

1

56

101

86

95

57

76

471

2

62

99

90

79

78

95

503

3

64

105

95

96

91

100

551

4

50

82

94

84

73

89

472

5

58

83

89

96

59

98

483

Total

346

571

540

545

449

534

2985

Target

362

572

568

572

444

512

3030

Diff

-16

-1

-28

-27

5

22

-45

 

Option Enrollment and Demographic Highlights, Sept. 2002:

Sch

AreaSqMi

Enrl 9/02

Target 9/02

Dif / Target

#Riders

#Walkers

%Walkers

DT

1.71

333

362

-29

59

279

82.5%

JEF

9.19

561

572

-11

149

406

73.2%

JFK

3.38

538

568

-30

44

509

92.0%

OAK

5.28

538

572

-34

155

356

69.7%

PAR

3.62

433

444

-11

106

345

76.5%

KEL

3.87

550

512

38

123

422

77.4%

TOT

27.05

2953

3030

-77

636

2317

2953

 

Home District/Sending District Analysis

Sch

TotHomeDist

#DT

#Jef

#JFK

#Oak

#Par

TotOthrDist

Total School

%HmDist

%OthrDist

DT

189

X

0

0

0

144

144

333

56.76%

43.24%

JEF

559

0

X

0

2

0

2

561

99.64%

0.36%

JFK

501

0

0

X

33

4

37

538

93.12%

6.88%

OAK

198

179

46

74

X

41

340

538

36.80%

63.20%

PAR

350

1

82

0

0

X

83

433

80.83%

19.17%

KEL

0

30

0

0

501

19

550

550

0.00%

100.00%

TOT

1797

210

128

74

536

208

1156

2953

60.85%

39.15%

 

 

"Students 9/2002 by Grade and Prior School" report is attached. This report displays students at each school as of 9/2002, by grade and prior school.

 

 

Sch/9/2002

FPS Students by Grade and Sending School Per Option 11b, 9/2002

 

From School/

K

1

2

3

4

5

Total

Davis-Thayer

 

DT

32

35

39

31

29

23

189

 

PAR

24

27

25

19

29

20

144

 

TOTAL - DT

56

62

64

50

58

43

333

Jefferson

 

JEF

101

99

105

82

83

89

559

 

OAK

 

 

 

 

 

2

2

 

TOTAL - JEF

101

99

105

82

83

91

561

Kennedy

 

JFK

80

86

87

86

82

80

501

 

OAK

6

3

7

6

7

4

33

 

PAR

 

1

1

2

 

 

4

 

TOTAL - JFK

86

90

95

94

89

84

538

Keller

 

DT

7

5

4

4

5

5

30

 

OAK

65

87

92

82

92

83

501

 

PAR

4

3

4

3

1

4

19

 

TOTAL - DT

76

95

100

89

98

92

550

Oak

 

DT

33

29

32

33

29

23

179

 

JEF

4

8

12

6

7

9

46

 

JFK

16

7

15

9

14

13

74

 

OAK

33

29

29

33

37

37

198

 

PAR

9

6

8

3

9

6

41

 

TOTAL - OAK

95

79

96

84

96

88

538

Parmenter

 

DT

 

 

1

 

 

 

1

 

JEF

13

16

15

12

9

17

82

 

PAR

44

62

75

61

50

58

350

 

TOTAL - PAR

57

78

91

73

59

75

433

Grand Total

 

471

503

551

472

483

473

2953

 

Map Links

 

Option 11d Town-wide Map (North)

 

Option 11d Town-wide Map (South)

 

Option 11d Davis-Thayer District Map

 

Option 11d, Jefferson District Map

 

Option 11d, JFK District Map

 

Option 11d, Keller District Map

 

Option 11d, Oak Street District Map

 

Option 11d, Parmenter District Map