The recent news of the DOE’s decision to drop the proposal to move IDP is a victory not only for all four high schools co-located in the campus, but for all public schools in the city.
In my experience as an involved parent, PTA president and previous member of the Community Education Council, I have seen the DOE at many times make decisions on rezoning, co-location, moving and closing schools without the support of the community. I am thrilled that this time we were able to join together, raise our voices and say “NO MORE!”

I appreciate that many of us spent endless hours in our efforts to keep IDP “home.” We have spent valuable time needlessly, much of it parent volunteer time. It is time we would rather have spent bettering our schools and communities. More importantly, I hope the DOE realizes that we don’t want to do it again.
— Robin Klueber President, Frank McCourt High School PTA

Only Adopt
I was pleased with much of Cori Menkin’s story educating readers regarding pet shops and their relationship to commercial breeding facilities known as puppy mills [“Don’t Be Fooled By Deceptive Puppy Mills,” Jan. 17], but I do have one major point of contention: Menkin writes of making adoption the “first option” when looking for a companion animal. I say it should be the first, second, third and only option.

There is no reason to purchase an animal via pet shop, over the Internet or from those whom Menkin labels “responsible breeders.”

For the thousands of animals living and dying every year in shelters and breed-specific rescue groups, I suggest that “responsible breeders” put a temporary halt to their puppy/money-making operations, and, instead, lead all potential customers to the many shelter animals already looking for homes.

Menkin, an ASPCA employee, understandably mentions only the ASPCA facilities, but there are many other shelters and small rescues to visit, including Animal Care & Control at 326 E. 110th St., where you will save a life and a great deal of money.
—  Mickey Kramer, President and founder of Iadoptedmypet.com

Saving the Horses
Many people want to see the horse carriage trade come to an end in NYC, and with the looming mayoral election, now is the time to get serious and support legislation that could make it happen. We started this campaign in 2006, and all online polls done since that time show between 75 and 80 percent of respondents favoring a ban of this trade.

Most people who support a ban just want to see the horses off the street and have not analyzed the electric car bill—Intro 86A. But the money does not exist for these cars. I know, because I have analyzed the bill and the financials behind it. It will cost $4,000,000 the first year to put 23 cars on the road to substitute for 23 horses. The overall cost will be close to $12,000,000. Politicians, who may not realize the funding does not exist, have said that they will leave it up to the tourists to decide which they like better—the cars or a carriage ride. This is not what anyone who supports getting the horses off the street wants. How much longer are politicians going to look the other way and try to shift responsibility for doing the right thing? Are they waiting for a human death to occur as it has in other parts of the country?

Besides, a ban of this business should not be dependent on the success of an untried business.
Continued support for this Emperor’s New Clothes bill is hurting the legislation that actually would make a difference: New York State Senate Bill S667 and Assembly Bill A997, sponsored by Sen. Tony Avella and Assembly Member Linda Rosenthal, respectively.

These bills are are not glamorous and not surrounded by celebrities but nevertheless have a better chance of passing and becoming law if legislators have the courage to support them.
It is time! Horses do not belong on congested city streets. There have been too many accidents to mention here, and many continue to go unreported.

Please get involved and visit us at www.banhdc.org.
—  Elizabeth Forel, Coalition to Ban Horse-Drawn Carriages

CORRECTION: In last week’s cover story about the Westside Rifle & Pistol Range, the weapon cocked by Howard Kwok’s rifle class was a rifle not a shotgun, as stated.

When the Department of Education proposed this move, they said the new Washington Heights location would provide Innovation students with their own space and would be a shorter commute for many of them.

But the idea sparked outrage among the Brandeis community, which consists of three other high schools and a charter elementary school, and within Community Board 7. Opponents argued that moving the high school would make the already disadvantaged students lose access to facilities in and around Brandeis like internships, extracurricular activities, a gym and child care for the school’s many teenaged parents. Apparently, their arguments were heard.

“We actively engage with and respond to the needs of the community,” said Department of Education representative David Pena. “Based on additional input from students, parents and community leaders, Innovation Diploma Plus High School will remain at the Brandeis Campus.”
Noah Gotbaum, a former president of the Community Education Council district that includes the Upper West Side schools, said the Department of Education had no justification for the proposal in the first place. He had organized a rally to protest it right before the hearing on Dec. 4, attended by over half of the student body, parents, elected officials and community members.

“They were basically destroying this incredible program,” Gotbaum said. “And that’s why you had 100 students come out to the rally and hearing.”

At the hearing, students presented a video explaining why they want to stay at Brandeis. It was an educational experience for them.

“I actually spoke at the hearing, and the Department of Education people weren’t even paying attention,” said Maria Henriquez, 18, a senior at Innovation Diploma Plus, whose daughter attends the Brandeis daycare. “If we had moved to Washington Heights, everyone would have dropped out. If you take away my education, you take away my child’s future!”

Among her concerns, she said, were issues of safety. “It’s dangerous because there are gangs in that area,” Henriquez said.

Gotbaum said he thought the Department of Education probably decided to drop the proposal because of pressure from the community, not the testimony of Innovation students.

“I am still unhappy that our community and school had to take to the streets to prevent something so egregious,” he said.

IDP’s move apparently did not really suit the Washington Heights community either, said Community Board 7 Chair Mark Diller, who said the neighborhood had wanted a science and technical high school in the space.

When the proposal to relocate IDP was first floated, many members of the community assumed the program was getting the boot to make room for the Upper West Success Academy Charter School to expand from early elementary to include a middle school. Upper West Success Academy refused to comment.

But the idea did not come from nowhere. During the October Community Education Council District 3 meeting, Yael Kalban, a representative with the Department of Education, said that they were planning on making room in Brandeis for an Upper West Success Middle School after IDP moved to Washington Heights.

“I don’t think IDP is given much priority at all,” Assembly Member Linda Rosenthal said. “It’s like a sick child. I don’t think they anticipated so much community outcry.”

Rosenthal did say that it is in the Success Academy contract to expand after a certain number of years, and that the community does need another middle school. Gotbaum said that the most likely option would be to open up a middle school when Beacon High School on West on 61st Street moves in two years’ time.

IS A PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL BEING SHOVED OUT OF THE BRANDEIS COMPLEX TO MAKE ROOM FOR A GROWING CHARTER SCHOOL?

Innovation Diploma Plus (IDP) is a high school designed to give students a second chance. A “transfer school,” it accepts people under-credited and over-aged—typically 18 years or older—who had a rough time in their original school, and are at risk of failing. Of its 189 students, many come from unstable homes. Some have children of their own and work to support their families. All are Black or Latino.

The Department of Education recently sparked a fierce debate when it proposed the relocation of IDP from its current place in the Brandeis Education Complex at 145 W. 84th St. to a building uptown at 601W. 183rd St. The Brandeis Education Complex currently houses five schools in one building: four other small high schools and Upper West Success Academy, a charter elementary school. The Washington Heights building will be vacated next school year, so if IDP were to move, it would be the only school in the building.

According to DOE, giving IDP students their own educational space would be beneficial. “The students will get more space, having their own building, and be closer to their community-based partner,” DOE spokesperson Marge Feinberg said in an e-mail. That “partner” is Alianza Dominicana, a nonprofit community development organization at 2410 Amsterdam Ave. Feinberg also noted that many students will have a shorter commute: 21 percent of students live in school district 6, whereas 7 percent live in the school’s current district, 3.

In October, the DOE released a 10-page educational impact statement that detailed the anticipated effects of the move on students and the school’s community. “The DOE does not anticipate that this proposal will impact the partnerships, programs, extracurricular activities and/or clubs offered at Innovation,” the statement said. “Students would continue to have the opportunity to participate in a variety of extracurricular programs, though the specific programs offered at a given school are always subject to change.” The statement added DOE’s intention to provide facilities for science and physical education classes, which do not currently exist in the building.

Many parents and administrators involved with Innovation, however, disagree that the move would benefit students. Leading up to a public hearing on the proposal on Dec. 4, Innovation community members began speaking out against the relocation, and questioning DOE’s intentions.

“As soon as the [relocation] announcement came out, the writing was on the wall,” said Christine Annechino, president of Community Education Council District 3 (CEC 3). Like many of the move’s opponents, she suspected that DOE’s hope for relocation might be motivated by a desire to cater to the interests of Success Academy, the educational complex’s lone charter elementary school. Success is a prominent educational power in New York, with schools open across the city. The Upper West branch moved into the Brandeis complex last year against the protests of many parents and school officials, who went as far as signing a lawsuit to block the school on the grounds that it would overcrowd the complex and take over arts resources.

Tensions between Success and the other co-located schools remain. With many young, high-achieving students and plans for expansion in the complex, opponents to the move reason, Success has a clear motive for favoring the relocation of IDP’s students.

In an e-mail exchange, Upper West Success Academy did not respond to questions about allegations of favoritism. “We are hopeful and confident that IDP, Success Upper West and the other schools that share space in the Brandeis building can continue to work cooperatively and collaboratively to offer the best education to all students,” the school said.

Favoritism or not, though, opponents to the relocation argued that students at IDP and the Brandeis complex in general both would suffer if IDP moved uptown. “You feel bad for the kids. They’re in a really disadvantaged position,” Annechino said. “Innovation students are going to lose a good, proper school environment. They’re being shifted around without any consideration. I don’t think the DOE takes them seriously.”

“The whole thing is just ridiculous,” said Robin Klueber, president of the Parent Teacher Association for Frank McCourt High School, one of the complex’s other high schools. The four high schools share resources, she explained, so IDP’s extracurricular activities would by necessity be affected. Students from the different schools interact and contribute to the same programs, such as sports teams and clubs. A group involved in an inter-school theater production set to premiere this week, she said, was dismayed that they might not be together after this year.

“The after-school programs are just fabulous,” Klueber added. “We share a community with Innovation.”

Numerous elected officials also have added their voices to the protests. “On its face, it appears that the DOE’s primary impetus for moving Innovation is to accommodate the elementary charter school that co-located in the building against strenuous community opposition,” Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal said. “That opposition was rooted in the fear that the charter school would eventually squeeze out the existing high school students in a quest for more space. Transfer schools such as Innovation Diploma Plus provide motivated students with a last-chance opportunity to receive a high school diploma. Innovation students, having found stability at Brandeis on the Upper West Side, are now having the rug pulled out from under them by the DOE.”

With the loss of access to Brandeis’ science, arts, sports and theater programs, Council Member Gale Brewer contended that “the health of [IDP’s] students in the broader sense will decline.” She added that parents of students at IDP had approached her and were “adamantly opposed” to the move.
IDP Principal Casey Jones did not respond to a request for comments. Some opponents to the move claim Jones’ support, but he has made no public statements against the proposal.

In light of the strong opposition, West Side Spirit asked DOE spokesperson Feinberg to address some of the specific complaints that the community surrounding IDP was raising. In addition to a loss of sports and arts resources, for instance, opponents have also voiced concerns that IDP students will lose access to a program called Lyfe, which provides day care for children so that their young parents can gain enough credits to graduate. Feinberg declined, and stated that all the move’s benefits were explained in the impact statement, which can be read online at schools.nyc.gov.

Opponents note that the proposed Washington Heights location Street is 90 years old, with 10 full-size classrooms and currently none of the amenities that Brandeis shares, such as a gymnasium, science lab, auditorium and black box theater. According to the impact statement, DOE intends to invest $1.5 to 3 million to bring the building up to code for physical education and science.
CEC 3 Councilmember Laurie Frey contended that regardless of facilities, the move would still be “socially isolating” for IDP students. “The U.S. Constitution does not guarantee us quality of success, but quality of access,” she said. “What gets you coming to school? The sports, the arts, your friends—those are the little pieces that get you up in the morning.” She argued that at-risk students like those at IDP need all the incentives they can get. To remove their support network, she suggested, is to cast them out from New York’s education system.

“There’s no apparent reason to move IDP unless you have a civil collusion between DOE and Success Academy,” she said. “There’s a real appearance of cronyism.”

Following last week’s hearing, DOE said that it is reviewing the community’s comments. The department will continue to accept oral and written opinions through Dec. 19, and then DOE’s Panel for Educational Policy will vote on the proposal on Dec. 20.