In her most recent email newsletter, Newton Mayor Ruthanne Fuller wrote…
An in-depth demographic study of how the four proposed large developments would impact the Newton Public Schools shows that the new housing (1,775 units) would create only a small amount of new enrollment. The study forecast only 83 additional students district-wide over the next decade.
Is she out of her mind? How can that possibly be?
Watch this video to see the presentation on the topic:
Programs and Serives Finance Committee April, 10, 2019 from NewTV on Vimeo.
Same Mayor who sent her kids to private schools, right?
What does that have to do with anything?
Simply doesn’t pass the sniff test. Ask any Newton parent…
I highly recommend this video. The demographer debunks a couple of myths. Refreshing!
I found this part very interesting (1Hr 17M 30s into) or click https://vimeo.com/330827787#t=1h17m30s. Watch for 2 mins
Its certainly not what we have been hearing various people testify over the last 5 years.
The Demographer is pretty insistent that over 55’s do not want to live amongst families with kids. He states it simply does not work!
The human experience matters…
It matters to students who spend their elementary or middle school experience in “modular classrooms,” because some previous “expert” got population projections wrong…
It matters to the parents of those children who have to put up with crowded classrooms, because some previous School Committee botched enrollment forecasts.
And it matters whether a Mayor has first-hand experience seeing his or her own kids squeezed in overcrowded public schools… or just sent them to private schools instead.
I don’t have enough time to figure out whether the 83 additional students that Greg mentions are 83 additional students due to development or 83 additional students over our current levels. My guess is that Greg, in his zeal to make development look good, is talking about the latter. This distinction is important. Why? Because our schools are already underfunded relative to peers. Adding extra students is costly. Period.
Let’s look at the DESE data. http://www.doe.mass.edu/finance/statistics/ppx14-18.html
Column K tells us that Newton spent an average of $19.4K per student in 2018. Boston? $21.9K. Weston? $25.4K. Wellesley? $20.4K. Brookline is not reporting data, but from years past, it was much higher from us.
Let’s pretend that the pundits get it right and enrollment goes down. Are we better off using the slack to jam more students from new developments in our classrooms, or using the slack to be more competitive in hiring new teachers? Buying better laboratory equipment? Doing a better job trying to help special needs students? Spending extra money on buses so we can start high school at a healthy time?
Its a poor analysis.
1. There is no consideration for the relative attractiveness of Newton real estate/Newton schools, and how that impacts the net influx of new young families into Newton.
2. The report mentions a “temporary wave” of increased elementary enrollment, yet gives no explanation of the driver of this wave, or the stated conclusion that it was temporary.
3. The analysis assumes 35 students in K-12 coming from 746 new housing units in 2025.
4. The report includes no analysis of student enrollment from similar housing developments.
5. There are no ranges or error bars on any of the projections– everything is assumed to be precisely accurate with no margin for error.
I could go on, but its not worth my time. I don’t believe its a good-faith effort by Fuller– its patently ridiculous to say that we can add 1000 units to the city, and it has no impact on student enrollment.
@Greg-
Happy Easter/Happy Passover.
I’m very surprised by your reaction.
I thought you would be more supportive after “hearing the conclusions from people paid to do this for a living’”.
Also, I think what Mike might have been saying, or maybe not, that it is rich that our mayor has absolutely no skin in the game, yet is tasked with making decisions for other peoples children.
It’s okay to mention that our mayor is a highly affluent Democrat who has chosen to bypass our highly rated schools. There’s nothing wrong with a Democrats privately educating their own children in elite exclusive prep schools and colleges. Heck, I’m sure even some Republicans do the same.
I understand why folks are dubious. But please watch the video before dismissing it.
If you did watch the presentation, you’d know that the consultant isn’t saying only 83 school age kids will be moving into these four developments. He’s saying that without these projects, Newton’s school population is headed for a major decline of about 400 kids.
Here’s why:
Newton is getting older. Generally speaking, people like to stay in Newton after their kids move out. That’s why empty nester households are Newton’s fastest growing household segment. And the number of empty nesters are going to keep growing because the majority of Newton households that do have kids are parents of middle or high schoolers. Those parents will make up the next wave of future empty nesters.
Meanwhile, women between age 20-34 (the demographic responsible for 80 percent of all births) is one of Newton’s smallest demographics.
Because we live in an expensive housing market that makes it hard for young families to move here, its unlikely that we’re going to see any significant increase in women 20-34, unless you build more housing, especially rental housing.
So if we don’t add housing, the forecast says our school population will shrink by about 400 students.
Add the four housing projects and that’s where you get the net gain forecast of 83.
And –as much as we like to think we’re special in Newton — these same demographic trends are happening in Needham, Wellesley, Arlington, Adnover and other peer communities.
@Jane: When you watch the video, you will hear that this demographic forecast is a step in the process towards addressing long range planning and needs of our schools and school projects. That’s why it was done.
One more thing from me: There is no evidence to suggest that Mayor Fuller is embracing this study because her kids didn’t go through our school system and therefore doesn’t care about our schools.
It’s an outrageous, meritless, ridiculous, accusation.
I don’t understand why enrollment projections for 10 years would have an impact on the decisions to be made about developments that will last for decades. I’m supportive of most of the developments, but making long term decisions using short term data doesn’t make sense to me.
The major flaw in the study is that it doesn’t include any data about the capacity problem that’s a result of programmatic additions over the last 25 years. During that period of time, no additional space other than modulars, has been added to 12 of the 15 elementary schools. The capacity problem is a major driver of overcrowding and will not go away even with the inevitable wax and wane of enrollment over decades.
@Greg
Feel free to address any of my criticisms above. The study doesn’t seem credible.
@Paul: I believe I just did. But to repeat: Yes, Newton is an attractive real estate market but young families cannot move here if (a) empty nesters continue to make up the fastest growing segment of our housing market (b) there’s no new housing supply and prices remain out of reach.
It’s that simple.
@Greg
I don’t think there is any data that supports your comments. Newton real estate is expensive now. Enrollment is increasing, as acknowledged in the report– that is the current data. No data is given as to why that dynamic will change.
And that’s only one flaw that I highlighted above. The others are pretty bad too.
@Paul: There isn’t data to support the fact this empty nesters are Newton’s fastest growing segment of home owners?
There isn’t data to suggest that the majority of school families have middle and high schoolers?
There isn’t data to suggest that young families can’t find or afford homes here?
Of course there is.
A decline of 400 kids over a school system with 10,000 kids doesn’t sound like a big enough problem for me to add four developments with more than 83 kids being added to the system. People move to Newton for the schools, and in my own head, each development would add 100 kids.
Right now the school system while receiving a good chunk of the city budget isn’t funded as it should be. 12 years ago, elementary kids took a music class and a separate recorder class. Now it is combined. Never separated after the budget crunch.
My son who is a junior, never had a class in elementary school that was under 25 kids. 25 kids is a big class, and with old buildings, the classroom seems smaller.
The after school programs don’t have enough space.
School lunches run out of the hot lunch for popular items.
The cafeterias in middle school are more crowded than ever.
To me, I feel the numbers are being grossly under estimated. (Maybe that is because my kids were affected by the Needham Street Avalon numbers.) But I don’t see the need for four major developments in a small amount of time.
Greg – I’m aware of why the study was done.
The “major” decline of 400 students still puts the system 1000 students above the 2004 enrollment numbers. As you may recall, the total increase in enrollment that caused the overcrowding amounted to 1400 students. At that time educators working in the schools were already expressing serious concerns about overcrowding and lack of space for new programs, and the staffing and space required for these programs.
And for about the 10th time, the report does not address the lack of capacity caused by added programs to address the range of needs of students in the 21st century, the changes in curriculum, and the growing role of technology at all levels. Overcrowding isn’t just about classroom space – that’s actually the easier problem to solve if you happen to like modulars. I’m also troubled by the number 83 – just a little too specific for me.
My goal isn’t to undermine the developments, but to highlight that we need an aggressive rebuilding program that expands the facilities to accommodate programs for a 21st century education. A report that leads us to believe that we don’t need that is worrisome.
It is interesting to see how many folks with (apparently) no technical knowledge of demographics are so quick to dismiss this report and, instead, view the whole thing in conspiratorial terms. It would seem that Newton is no less immune from the same trends that have brought the world anti-vaxers than other places. Hopefully our elected representatives are not equally infected. #NotHoldingBreath
NewtonMom correctly says: “The after school programs don’t have enough space.”
This specific problem is due far more to the almost complete lack of coordination between NPS and after-school programs than it is to crowding.
A well-managed schools/after-school relationship that includes transportation could serve far more kids and families.
@Greg
“There isn’t data to suggest that young families can’t find or afford homes here?”
The data suggests that plenty of young families do afford homes here. That’s why enrollment is going up, despite home prices.
There are clearly plenty of families who can’t afford to live in Newton. But enough can afford it that prices keep going up. Anecdotally, we have two recent neighbors that have bought in the past year, $1M to $1.5M homes, and both are young families, with 1 or 2 physicians each. Unless the local health care starts to crater, there will continue to be a steady supply of families with $300-500K+ in annual income that can afford homes in the $1.5-2.5M range.
Demand outstrips supply in Newton, that is extremely clear from the real estate data. Who exactly do you think is buying these homes besides families with school age children?
Empty nesters becoming the fastest growing segment is interesting data demographically, but very incomplete. Is there any data suggesting how many plan to stay? At what prices? If Newton real estate prices keeps increasing 5-10%, meaning prices are an additional 30-50% in 2024, are they still sitting still, even if their home is by far their largest financial asset for many of them? What assumptions on empty nesters selling were made in the report? Based on what data?
Not having any answers to these questions is why the data is far from complete, and the resulting analysis being pretty shoddy.
PS Jane’s comments are important, and somehow completely unaddressed by others here. For those of us that put schools #1, questions about capacity that she has mentioned are absolutely critical. I’d feel a lot differently about these developments if it didn’t seem like the children were the ones bearing the hidden costs, while the developers make off like bandits.
Kids first.
Mike – If I understand correctly, the afterschool programs are housed in the schools but otherwise are not coordinated programs, with separate staff, and is paid for by the parents who use it. There’s only so much that one principal can take on and an additional program that provides care until 6:00pm is just too much.
It’s obviously better for the kids to remain in the same building, but as valuable and necessary as they are, the afterschool programs are one more stress on the capacity issues facing elementary schools. The facilities weren’t designed and constructed for this and many other programs.
As yet, no one appears to be interested in the impact of the overcrowding on those who work and learn in these buildings.
Nobody seems to be addressing @Jane Frantz and @NewtonMom’s concerns, yet they are the ones with the “real life” data. Also, my Newton Centre may be an anomaly but in the past year, three young families have moved in – one with a toddler and a baby on the way, and two with kids under 5.
oooops – meant my Newton Centre neighborhood
I’ll add a further comment to Mike Striar’s second post. The lack of “skin in the game” is a real problem not only in Newton but in school systems all up and down the Eastern seaboard.
Why not make it a requirement that the children of all elected Democrat politicians attend the public schools and state colleges in their hometown and state? What better way to show leadership and support for public education, since these pols are always paying lip service to public education anyway. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
@Paul Green,
I am a proud graduate of MA Public Schools and UMASS Amherst. It is hard enough to get into UMASS, lets not force some people to attend it because of their parents. I went to UMASS for the cost factor and I loved it. But I am sad to know that many in state students can’t get in because you need a very, very high GPA to get in now. And more out of staters go there now, especially since they pay more than in state students. I know it might have been an off hand remark, but as a parent now facing the huge burden of college in less than two years, I would love families who can afford private schools go to private colleges, and let those families who need public college attend UMASS.
never underestimate the sacrifices parents will endure for a good school district…
– yes, they will pay 1M for a small/old/odd house and sacrifice vacations & eating out & savings
– they will even bribe college admissions!
higher home prices do not necessarily mean less school age kids
@NewtonMom-
I am a UMASS graduate as well and am quite proud of it. It was not an offhand remark. Democrat Politicians should be required to send their kids to UMASS instead of an elite private college even more so, because despite their support of public education, Dem pols have been no friend of the UMASS system.
The UMASS system continues to succeed and surpass expectations despite the fact that it is larded with political hacks and other patronage flotsam. A school that once was affordable for the children of middle class Democrat
families now prioritizes accepting out of state kids and their much fatter tuitions because of the salary, pensions, perks and high end office rental expenses of
Democrat politicians like UMASS president Marty Meehan and William
Bulger.
I watched the whole meeting and I have to say I am not convinced either. I have seen this report before in Wellesley and below is why I’m skeptical.
A report issued to Wellesley by Cropper GIS/ McKibbon Demographics dated 3/2013 has this statement in its executive summary:
“Total enrollment is forecasted to decline by 243 students, or -5.0%, between 2012-13 and 2017-18. Total enrollment will decline 317 students, or -6.9%, from 2017-18 to 2022-23.”
In 2012/13 Wellesley’s enrollment was 4857 and in 2017/18 was 4908, an increase of 51 students. The enrollment also increased to 4975 in 2015/16. There is always an ebb and flow to enrollment. In October of 2013 Cropper updated their forecast due to home sales and an uptick in new builds but they didn’t change the statement above about a 243 student loss. If we look at the 10 year estimated decline according, to Croppers initial report from the numbers above, we would be expecting a decline of 560 students by 2022. Current enrollment for this year (18/19) was 4863 which is 7 years out already. (Let me know if you want links)
Wellesley has had a decline in elementary enrollment over the past few years but the one distinct difference between Wellesley and its surroundings towns is that we are just starting to really push toward a 10% 40B housing goal, we are at 6.3%. Wellesley’s School Committee is interested in closing a elementary school in the near future due to this predicted decline. As you can probably guess I do not think this is a wise idea. As I researched surrounding towns there seems to be a direct correlation between increased apartment units and enrollment increases.
I agree with others who have stated that parents will move into a town for a good school system and sacrifice a lot to do so, especially for Special Ed. I do believe many older residents could also move to these units if they are nice enough and opening their homes to younger families. I do not see Wellesley filling these new units with young single residents because the night life here leaves much to be desired.
If the goal of the Newton enrollment study is to justify the new developments I would take a hard look at other towns and this statement from the MAPC explaining the exceptions of when 40B does affect enrollment:
“Well located, affluent districts, with high-performing schools. Districts like Arlington, Belmont, Brookline, Cambridge, Lexington, Lincoln, and Natick that could be characterized as highly desirable from an educational perspective, with high standardized-test scores relative to the rest of the region. They have high proficiency ratings on the 2013 3rd grade English Language Arts (ELA) MCAS and have very high home values. With a few exceptions, these districts are also highly accessible to employment both in Boston and along Route 128, and they feature compact neighborhoods and vibrant, walkable downtowns that are increasingly attractive to some younger families. Basically, this grouping of districts, including two of the benchmark towns, Belmont and Lexington, that the MAPC analyzed come close to exactly describing the Town of Winchester’s current experience with rising enrollment levels.”
http://www.mapc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/MAPC_HousingEnrollment_Final.pdf
Jane Frantz said:
> There’s only so much that one principal can take on and an additional program that provides care until 6:00pm is just too much.
Principals don’t need to be responsible for after school programs. The issue is that there is no coordination between the school department and after school programs. That includes school size, but goes far beyond that.
The wait lists for after school programs is a problem even for schools comfortably below capacity. The lack of after school transportation means that we have no mechanisms to balance after school enrollment. That means more parents stressed out about childcare and having to spend money for babysitters or make other arrangements. It also means more cars on the roads near our schools.
We need to fix after school, but putting the blame for its failings narrowly on school crowding misses the bulk of the problem.
Newton’s (as in Sir Issac) laws of physics apply to Newton’s housing.
But unless empty nesters leave their homes (either by moving or dying; those are the only two options folks) or we build new homes, there is no opposite motion that allows new families to move here.
Sure, we all may know someone who has sold their home to a new family. But the facts are facts folks; empty nesters are the fastest growing segment of our real estate market.
The mayor of Newton didn’t dream this up.
Sir. Issac Newton did.
Empty nesters are the fastest growing segment right now… yet enrollment is increasing right now.
Those are facts.
Paul: Stop making things up.
Enrollment declined this year.
This post was created in the hopes of supporting big development. The majority of the comments suggest otherwise (calling BS).
Keep ‘em coming!
@mike Halle and others
The John M Barry Newton Boys and Girls Club on Watertown street in Newtonville has an after school program and Transportation. And I believe it is $125 a year. Give David Sellars, the director a call. Homework rooms, adult supervision, sports and computers. Did I mention Transportation?
Jack, yes, the Boy’s and Girl’s Club, and the Y, are great options. Both run their own transportation. And in a joint letter to the TAB, leaders of both organizations said that they could serve more families if Newton provided transportation like other communities do.
Not trying to derail this thread, just pointing out this is a bigger and only loosely coupled issue.
Greg – I hate to be morbid, but where will these empty nesters be in 15 years? I’d love to remain an empty nester forever, but it just doesn’t work that way.
School enrollment waxes and wanes over time (I’m referring to the lifetime of a school facility – over decades). In this day and age, a wane in enrollment would enable the learning center teachers to have adequate space for materials and student instruction, professionals who have confidential conversations about students (psychologist, inclusion facilitator, social worker) to have designated spaces that ensure privacy, the literacy specialist, literacy aides, and the bookroom for the literacy program to have a designated space. The ELL program would have a designated room, there would be spaces for individualized and small group instruction, three professionals would not be sharing a space, no one would work in a converted closet, or eat lunch in the custodian’s storage space. And the list goes on.
Then inevitably another “wax” would begin and these programs would begin to share space again, but at the expense of the students they serve. As the saying goes, a teacher’s working conditions are students’ learning conditions.
Matt – I’m not opposed to development at all -I highly value affordable housing and want there to be places for seniors to move to within our community and there aren’t any right now. That’s not my point. I’ve been speaking out very publicly about the conditions and overcrowding in the elementary schools for well over a decade.
Until quite recently, it was perfectly fine to have elementary schools that didn’t even have a cafeteria, forget about these other spaces necessary to provide for an excellent education for all students in this day and age. The Newton solution has been to stick a modular onto a school and call it a day. I’m merely pointing out that school capacity is way more complex than in the past.
My concerns are not related to the developments. We need to expand the schools no matter what in order to provide for a 21st century education.
Not morbid. More like the facts of life. (Hopefully some of us will have a chance to move into the new age-friendly units being proposed by Northland and others before we move beyond.)
But as noted in the video presentation: Empty nesters are not just Newton’s fastest growing home-owning segment but the number of empty nesters is going to keep growing because the majority of Newton households that currently have kids in our schools are parents of middle or high schoolers.
Once those kids move out, those parents will getting those AARP mailings (if they’re not already) make up Newton’s next wave of future empty nesters.
The Boys and Girls Club and the Y are excellent options and our family has used both, but they only offer transportation for certain parts of Newton. B&GC only picks up from Burr, Cabot, Franklin, Underwood, Lincoln-Eliot, and has an adult to walk with kids from Horace-Mann. And while the program there is only $125 a year, transportation is over $3,000 a year – which is still a good deal for those can afford it but for those who cannot it’s expensive and scholarships don’t cover transportation.
The Y’s program only provides transportation for Bowen, Cabot, Franklin, Horace Mann, Lincoln Eliot, and Underwood. Their after school is over $6,000 for 5 days a week throughout the school year, but I believe it includes transportation and there is financial aid.
So neither program can truly be used city-wide. It’s too bad Shephrd didn’t work out.
Given that the school system is the largest part of the city budget, wouldn’t it be better for Newton’s fiscal situation to have more empty nesters and fewer families with school age kids?
Jane, You speak the truth. The old Angier had no dedicated space for OT, Speech, etc. My son’s OT was done in the hallway (not private and certainly not great for a child with ADHD). While the teachers worked miracles in that space it was not a good space. The new Angier has space, but if we continue to cram more and more kids into the current spaces, than the literacy center and the OT and the PT and Speech all share “an office” with no private meeting spaces. Today’s education system is so much different than the 1940’s, including eating lunch at school, more kids that require special education, etc.
And for as many of these developments, we are not attracting “regular” students, but students who might need SPED or ELL services. Everyone is welcome to move to Newton and use the public schools. There is no guarantee that all “83” kids will be “regular” education students.
Imagine if half of these 83 kids who go to one elementary school require SPED services. Then we run out of space. And multiply that with four major developments? We run out of K-12 space quickly.
And the after schools . . . . I know that they are not run by the schools, but it is frustrating to move into Newton and find out you are not guaranteed a spot in your after school program. It is quite a shock after buying a house for $$$ that there is no space for your child.
But the softer sides are the whole school gets crowded – cafeteria, bus, clubs in high school, band, class size, library, nurses, etc
NewtonMom
“It is quite a shock after buying a house for $$$ that there is no space for your child…”
For the sake of “social justice and equality”, you are expected to “shut-up” and “take it”
Yes… this is the reality today, unless we “speak up”
Everyone knows (or should know) that you can’t just project current trends out into the future. Try doing that with the stock market…..
Hi All – I am looking at crunching some numbers to develop a “grass-roots” point of view on the school enrollment, and impact of development on the schools.
Are there any members on this board, who have skills in quant/stat analysis or demographics or related fields, and can find time in their busy schedules?
If so, please contact me directly at [email protected]
Thanks in advance
Sumukh