16 Detroit Public Schools to Close by Fall

[DetroitTeacher]

Most of my kids' parents don't have a choice. They are stuck without the means to move out of the city. Those that COULD leave, left long ago.

Why do people choose to live in Detroit?

[Hypestyles]

how many, if any, of the planned to close buildings are actually structurally unsafe? is there a specific plan on how to proceed with the properties once vacant?

..how many currently abandoned school buildings are still left vacant and unkept? Offhand I know of one, 'catharine crosman', adjacent to the Herman Keifer facilities..

[jolla]

Most of my kids' parents don't have a choice. They are stuck without the means to move out of the city.

I don't understand that. Inkster, Taylor, Mt. Clemens, and Warren are all cheap [[and if you have Section 8, it doesn't much matter). Why not move there?

[MidTownMs]

I don't understand that. Inkster, Taylor, Mt. Clemens, and Warren are all cheap [[and if you have Section 8, it doesn't much matter). Why not move there?

Wow. If it were only that easy.

[313WX]

Why do people choose to live in Detroit?

Many people I'm sure don't have a choice in the matter.

As for the rest, maybe they don't mind having a shit poor quality of life [[for a 1st world major city).

[DetroitTeacher]

They can't afford to MOVE anywhere. Moving takes money [[think first, last and security) and semi decent credit. Who wants to rent to someone who has horrible credit? They can't afford to BUY a house in this market, either [[or sell theirs, if they do own a home). Hell, most of my kids don't have lunch money or a way to get to school, if it weren't for the free bus pass they get. My kids' parents don't have a choice in where they live. They can't afford to move. It's that simple. Not to mention, those that Do have employment need to be near a bus route semi close to their jobs. 80% of my kids' parents don't have a car. Did you just fall out of the sky?

I don't understand that. Inkster, Taylor, Mt. Clemens, and Warren are all cheap [[and if you have Section 8, it doesn't much matter). Why not move there?

[SWMAP]

But what about the choices? Don't they all have cell phones? How many of the kids that you teach DON'T have cell phones? And aren't they all, pretty much, internet-enabled? How much does that cost, per family?

And how about cable or like it? Don't they all pretty much have that? And if their subscriptions to both are cut off - don't they scrape together enough money to get reinstated?

If a family wants to move and improve their circumstances - can't they pool their resources, reduce their non-critical spending for a few months and get the money together?

Maybe its inertia. I don't fault that because I suffer from that, too - at least about leaving.

[corktownyuppie]

This is just getting silly now. It sounds like now they are just throwing shit at the wall and hoping something sticks.

I get where you're coming from. That might be what they're doing. Maybe they're trying in vain to cut annual expenditures -- even if that requires upfront capital investment.

Here's the main problem. It transcends race, class, education, political affiliation: There is no model for how to shrink a city.

If you build a hotel for 500 because of today's demand, and then 5 years from now you're only filling it with 200...you just consolidate guests shut down 60% of your floors. If you build a factory to run 3 shifts and produce 20,000 parts per day because of current demand, and demand drops to 7,000 parts per day...you lay off 2 shifts.

If a city starts with 2 Million people...loses 60% of them...but there's no way to consolidate costs...and those remaining 40% are still paying for all the infrastructure...and they also happen to be the poorest 40%...and they're on the hook for paying pensions to the 60% that have left...

There is no model for this.

I think that if you could pause time for 12 months, and give the city planners, stakeholders, financiers, residents...time to all come to the table, and find a workable solution... we might be able to do it. But right now it's like playing Whack-a-Mole with a 50 lb. hammer. By the time we make changes to the playing field, the game has already changed.

I don't know what we're going to do...but my take on it is that those who rely on the city for a lot will suffer. Those who are generally self-reliant won't. And it'll have to be that way for awhile until we can figure out the model for how to do all of this.

[firstandten]

But what about the choices? Don't they all have cell phones? How many of the kids that you teach DON'T have cell phones? And aren't they all, pretty much, internet-enabled? How much does that cost, per family?

And how about cable or like it? Don't they all pretty much have that? And if their subscriptions to both are cut off - don't they scrape together enough money to get reinstated?

If a family wants to move and improve their circumstances - can't they pool their resources, reduce their non-critical spending for a few months and get the money together?

Maybe its inertia. I don't fault that because I suffer from that, too - at least about leaving.

Still there are up-front costs to moving that many families can't handle. Even though you have kids with cell phones. internet access etc. it gets turned off a lot and any blip to the monthly expenses are going to put these families into a hole.

Also many of these families support systems [[mostly relatives), as poor as it may be are in the same area which makes it tough for some of these families to up and move.

[Kevgoblue]

If a city starts with 2 Million people...loses 60% of them...but there's no way to consolidate costs...and those remaining 40% are still paying for all the infrastructure...and they also happen to be the poorest 40%...and they're on the hook for paying pensions to the 60% that have left...

There is no model for this.

This is a very important point. And one which is rarely discussed. I guess the majority is alright with it. But heaven forbid someone suggest to raise taxes on the upper1%. Or on those collecting the pensions off the back of the remaining 40%, for that matter.
But ultimately this scenerio is unsustainable. Don't worry, the 60% that have left will start voicing concerns when their checks stop showing up.

[313WX]

Don't worry, the 60% that have left will start voicing concerns when their checks stop showing up.

And when their taxes go up once their township's bond rating collapses due to Detroit's debt.

[corktownyuppie]

And when their taxes go up once their township's bond rating collapses due to Detroit's debt.

This is one thing that leadership on all sides of the aisle fail to articulate to the masses: We are interdependent. If Detroit goes bankrupt, it means everyone around us will be paying more taxes to keep up with increased borrowing costs. People need to understand...you can help us a little bit now, or you can pay a whole lot more to keep yourself afloat later.

On the flipside, Detroiters also need to understand that even though we are interdependent, we need help from our neighbors more than they need ours. So it's totally reasonable for them to demand control and oversight in exchange for assistance.

Lastly, I have no financial sympathy for the Top 1%. I think they should pay more. Let's just make sure not to make them pay so much more that it makes sense for them to move somewhere else.

[royce]

For a moment think about a losing sports team. That team will try to attract the best players to improve its standings but it will have to spend a lot of money to get them. Well, if DPS wants to stop losing students to charters and to other districts, then it has to offer an incentive to keep the students it has and hopefully bring back some students it lost. Building state of the art schools is the best way to attract and keep students, at least in the short term.

The old Martin Luther King high school was built in the late 1960s. By DPS building stock age, it was still a new school compared to those built before WWII. However, to compete with its rivals Cass and Renaissance, which both got new schools within the last 10 years, MLK had to get a new school. With the new school MLK keeps their current students, who might have gone over to Cass or Renaissance, and they attract some former students and a few new ones who were going elsewhere. Sometimes you got to spend the money to get a winning team.

BTW, has anybody figured out the 16 schools/school buildings that are closing? After reading the news article, my numbers don't add up to 16.

[Kevgoblue]

I'm not sure the sports team comparison is a good one. If the Lions draft a top tier player coming out of college they have to cut a not so good player to keep to their 53 man roster. Comparitively speaking this should make the team better with every draft pick / trade.

DPS does not displace the underachievers if a good student with a concerned parent enrolls. The school still has all the underachieving students accompanied by their unconcerned parents. Personally I would rather have my child in a pre-WW1 school full of students with involved parents than in a brand new school filled with their current student body [[non Cass or Renaissance).