Press enter to see results or esc to cancel.

Park City High School Didn’t Really Slip

I received an email from Ed Mulick, Co President of the Park City Educational Association, regarding Park City School District’s US News and World Reports rankings. As you may recall, PC High School wasn’t ranked this year in the top 6000 high schools in the US. This was a shock to many people across the community. Mr Mulick provides some background on that below and asks us all to step off the ledge. 🙂


Dear Park Rag,

Park City High School didn’t really slip.

A few weeks ago Newsweek released their annual high school rankings and, as has been noted by several people in the community and the Park Rag, Park City High School is no longer the top ranked school in Utah. It has slipped to #10. It is not even one of the top 2,000 in the nation. What happened?

Newsweek changed its ranking formula for determining top-performing high schools. The formula used to be pretty simple: the total number of AP exams given at the end of the year divided by the number of graduating seniors. For your information, those numbers have NOT changed.

Was original formula a fair way to rank the high schools in the first place . . . that’s open to question. The new formula is probably more inclusive and a better all around measure. Who knows? Obviously, Park City High School’s new ranking shows there is room for improvement.

Personally, I think people (i.e. realtors, parents, administrators, school boards, and teachers) put too much emphasis on rankings, which can be narrowly-defined and superficial. I think they’re over-hyped, especially when they come out in your favor.

I’m proud that Park City School District offers many excellent programs involving special education, English Language Learners, music, and other extracurricular offerings, programs that do not involve just high levels of academic accomplishment. It’s amazing what Park City School District offers for a 3A school. I’m not saying there isn’t room for improvement, but these are the programs that define our school district and, in my opinion, make it great.

Thank you for your time and attention to the issues facing our community regarding our public schools. . . . there is a lot on the table.

Ed Mulick
Co-President of PCEA

A Rebuttal to Our Recent Article on Growth

A few days ago I wrote an article on growth in our area. I received a very well thought-out response from Park City Planning Commissioner Steve Joyce. He was gracious enough to let me print it. I would encourage you to read it for an alternative perspective.

 


I started reading your blog a month or so ago and have really enjoyed it, particularly with the school bond discussions. However, I think you may have done your readers a bit of a disservice in your recent entry about Growth. I have been on the Park City Planning Commission for about 18 months and that has really made it easier for me keep informed about all the development potential in town. Frankly, I find it scary. One of my fellow commissioners said it best when he offered “This could end up with traffic being as bad as Sundance week, every day of the year”.

You pointed out that a lot of the development rights were vested decades ago, and still aren’t built. That’s true, but they are coming, and coming quickly. For infill projects, simply look around town. There is development going on everywhere and some of it is significant. The Stein Eriksen Residences were part of the decades old DV master plan, but now we have 14 large houses and 40 condominiums going in. City Council’s density transfer negotiations with the Treasure project fell through, and it is back in the Planning Department. PCMR, before it sold, brought the first plans to develop the parking lots at the PCMR base. That included the Woodward School and a new Parking Deck. Vail has made it clear that we can expect plans from them sooner rather than later. Deer Valley has shown their plans to start construction on 7 or 8 new lifts on the Jordanelle side, all to support the massive development getting ready to be done there. We have seen how Vail’s talented development team can bring $50 million in upgrades in one summer. That same company has millions of vested square feet of development at mid-mountain at Canyons (or Park City Canyons Half or Park City Mountain Right Side?) 

You said “The other issue is that most people who cry “growth” have some vested interest in the idea of growth.” I am certainly one who is crying “growth” and have nothing whatsoever to gain from it. I hope that our citizens realize that we are really running out of opportunities to purchase and protect open space. I believe that in the next 5 years, there won’t be any significant chunks of land inside the city boundaries that won’t be held by developers. Major traffic enhancements and changes often take years to get through funding cycles. You can’t wait until everything has ground to a halt to start taking action.

Of course all these changes won’t happen instantly, but I think they will come a lot bigger and faster than you implied in your blog entry. I would encourage Park City residents to get involved or stay involved in the discussions about housing, traffic, and growth. 

 Thanks for your hard work.

 Steve Joyce

Where is the Trust with our Schools?

I’m not upset that you lied to me, I’m upset that from now on I can’t believe you.Friedrich Nietzsche

A person commented on our live blog of the School Board’s Master Planning Committee meeting and said, “One could ask why they don’t reevaluate their “learning plan” if having dual immersion, full day kindergarten and on campus pre school are costing millions. Those programs were sold as cost neutral.”

Those programs were sold as cost neutral? I hadn’t heard that before. So, I decided to research the topic. Through the grace of the Park Record’s website, I found the following:“In theory, the only additional cost [of dual immersion] to the district should be through additional training, board member Maurice Hickey said.” Yet, five years later we are looking at adding on to McPolin to account for dual immersion? What’s that cost? We aren’t sure yet, but it is likely to be between $2-$5 million. That’s a lot of money that could be used on teachers.

If it was an isolated incident, you could chalk it up to a mistake. We all make mistakes. Yet, I come back to the school district’s PC CAPS program. That’s the one where students work with local companies to do projects and better understand the real world. PC CAPS was originally billed as a program where students would work at company locations and cost the district about $75,000 per year. Then we heard that the school district wanted to build a $5 million PC CAPS building and that the annual budget is about $450,000. The building was shot down due to public outcry but the ongoing costs remains. Now the district has upended the high school library to place the PC CAPS program. Wait… why do we need to pay for space? Aren’t students supposed to be working at their company’s facilities?

Let’s go back further. When Park City High School was renovated, it allegedly cost about $10 million more than was estimated. This was somewhere between a 25% to 50% overrun.

Now the public is being asked to pay for a bond (probably $40-$50 million+) to tear down Treasure Mountain Junior High, add on to the high school, build a 5th/6th school at Ecker Hill and add on to McPolin elementary. This effort seems to have began as an effort to rebuild Treasure Mountain Junior High and has morphed into … uh…something. As time progressed, it was messaged as a need to fix the fact that only 9% of 11th grade hispanic kids are proficient in English (after spending their tenure in Park City Schools). So, we introduce all day kindergarten to ENSURE this population is proficient in english (9 years later). This causes our elementary schools to become too full. This forces the the high school to accept a 9th grade class. A 9th grade class requires additions to the high school ($20 million), and then requires that 5th-8th grades reside at Ecker Hill ($30 million), which then means we need to build another school. Meanwhile, the district decides to also build on to McPolin elementary school to provide space for both kids that may come from the new Park City Heights development and to provide an alternative to kids that don’t want to be in dual immersion.

Do you believe all of that? Do you believe the school district will implement it correctly? Do you believe they will do it for the money they estimated?

You might. And that is fair. The school district may get it right.

Yet, I come down to the fact that recently they haven’t. We have the aforementioned three examples of getting it wrong. We also have the fact our schools have slipped out of the top rankings.

Are you willing to bet that $50 million will fix the problems? Or should we fix the problems and then, as citizens, provide the money? Park City Schools have lived off its reputation for a long time. Have we financially neglected our schools, which has led to some sub par results? Or is it something else? We do pay our teachers more than every other district in the state. Perhaps, it’s just the buildings. If only we had the best buildings, our students could achieve. Somehow, I doubt that. I’ll remind you that Treasure Mountain Junior High’s SAGE test scores were on par with the High School’s test results. Yes, students attending the “cursed” school had similar scores as those at our flagship school.

The more I hear, the more it just sounds like excuses. I’d be inclined to give the Park City School District the benefit of the doubt. Yet, as they say fool me once twice three times shame on you. Fool me again, shame on me.

Do I really believe that what the school district is proposing will provide a commensurate return in better education? I don’t think so. What I do believe is that when it doesn’t work they’ll be back with an even GRANDER plan to solve all our problems.

It’s unfortunate that it’s come to this, but there is just a lack of trust.

That’s the sort of thing that can’t be rebuilt with money.

Boston Out for Summer Olympics… Salt Lake in for the Winter Olympics?

“Boston’s bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics flamed out in spectacular fashion this week, with local organizers and the U.S. Olympic Committee deciding to part ways after the mayor and Massachusetts’ governor refused to be rushed into a decision putting taxpayers on the hook if the games went over budget,” says the Associated Press.

One person’s loss is another person’s gain, I suppose. The questions are whether that person is Salt Lake and whether it really is a gain. In 2012, Salt Lake City indicated their intention to bid on the 2026 Winter Games (funny how that coincides with the beginning of what became the Mountain Accord Process). With regard to Olympics, the Summer games are usually more profitable than the Winter games, so it was somewhat assumed that the US would try to get the summer 2024 games (and not focus on 2026). With Boston’s withdrawal, that likely means a US bid for summer 2024 is done. Some people are pushing Los Angeles as an alternative but I would assume the Olympic Committee won’t look kindly on the press associated with a US city opting out. So, I’d bet our aspirations for 2024 are done.

That leaves winter 2026 as the next up. The front running US city is probably Salt Lake (others include Denver, Anchorage, Reno, and Lake Placid). We still have some infrastructure from the 2002 games and after Sochi’s $50 billion price tag, I would assume the narrative will be that you don’t have to spend $50 billion to host an olympics. Salt Lake fits that bill.

Of course, European cities like Dresden (Germany) and Trento (Italy) are looking to make bids. Yet, European finances, aren’t exactly in good shape and residents there could push back against the expense of the Winter Olympics.

What does that all mean? We won’t know until 2019 when the Olympic Committee will ultimately decide on the venue. Yet, right now the Olympic Committee is pushing Olympic Agenda 2020 which ” calls for a stronger focus on sustainability, legacy, and transparency, while making it easier for host cities to tailor Games that meet their needs rather than trying to fit a template.” That sounds right up Salt Lake City Mayor Ralph Becker’s sweet spot.

Right now it looks like SLC has a better than fighting chance. With Boston’s bow-out for the previous summer games it appears we will likely, at least, get serious consideration. I, personally, will be reading the Mountain Accord tea leaves as an indicator of the our region’s chances. I can hear it now from UDOT, “we need a tunnel to Park City to service these games.” Maybe it’s worth it. Maybe it’s not.

The long game is always the most interesting.

 

 

The Issue With Addressing Park City’s Potential Growth NOW

I received an email a few days ago asking if I had read the Park Record article on the projected growth in our area. The article does a great job highlighting all the available land with development rights in our area. There IS A LOT of land ready to be developed. Yet, what I have a little problem with is the leap from “what’s available to build/sell” to “who will actually buy it.”

Much of the land in question has had those development rights for a long time and nothing has been built. Why not? It didn’t make economic sense to actually build something. It was worth more to the owner to sit on the land and wait or to sell someone else on the future prospects (and have them wait).

So just because the land is available, it doesn’t mean that it will be swallowed up. There needs to be a trigger for growth. For instance, Silver Creek Village (by Home Depot) does have some 1300 units apportioned. However, it scheduled to be built out over 20 years. Don’t you think if they could sell 1300 units right now, at a “good” price, they would? Likewise, Park City Heights (by the movie studio) is scheduled to have a little under 300 units. They are lining buyers up for 100 units now. The affordable units are scheduled to be sold over the next 5-10 years. The point is that rampant growth isn’t going to happen immediately or probably even in the next decade.

The other issue is that most people who cry “growth” have some vested interest in the idea of growth. It is either the Governor’s Office who wants to show that Utah is doing fabulously because of their efforts. It is local government who seems to like to have problems to solve and the tax dollars associated with more development. It is property owners who want to use growth as a reason to drive up their values to sell their property to someone else.

If you take a look at long term trends, for instance in home ownership, you’ll see that it has almost never been lower (since it began being measured).

homeownership

So it makes me wonder who is going to buy all this available property. Second home owners? Probably in a lot of cases. Then it makes me wonder if owners will be foolish enough to develop the land, if returns are low (due to lack of demand). I don’t think so in the medium term (unless the economy really goes bad and they need the money).

In the long run, we are likely looking at the Park City area being another suburb of Salt Lake City, just like Draper. And unfortunately there is not much we can do about it, as that ship sailed a long time ago. However, the long run could be 50 years. A lot can happen in 50 years. Skiing could no longer be an option here.

While we wait on what could happen in 50 years, we need to concentrate on the next 5 years. We need to make sure we aren’t listening to the boy who cried growth and making bad investments during the interim. Squandering time and money now, on something that will happen in 20 years, is a recipe for disaster. We’ll just have to spend more money then to correct the problems caused by our actions today and really fix the issues of the future.

To be sure, it is a tricky situation. We don’t want to be caught off guard and have to play catch-up but we don’t want to waste money prematurely either.

Welcome to The Real World

A few days ago, I received a comment from a reader about rebuilding a 7/8/9th school on the Treasure Mountain site. The reader commented, “Hundreds of TMJH students walk back and forth to the HS for classes. This not only isn’t fun in the winter, it also makes them late for classes.” I was visiting with a friend about this and her comment was, “Did you ever walk across your college campus when it was -25 degrees and bare skin would freeze in 30 seconds? No? Did you ever have 15 minutes between college classes but the walk took 20 minutes? Welcome to the real world.”

She has a point. I lived about a mile from campus during college. That was about a 20 minute walk. Campus took about another 20 minutes to walk across if my class was on the other side. And yes, in winter, it was cold. We talk about preparing our kids for the future challenges all the time, yet I think many people would agree that Park City doesn’t represent the real world for many things our children will encounter.

Some of the things that come to mind from my time in school:

  • If you go to a state school, you will have 300 people in your English 101 class (and math, and biology, and…).
  • Most instructors don’t give a damn about you. If they do, they’ll pretend they don’t to make your better.
  • You will take classes in some pretty crappy environments. If you don’t succeed just because the paint is peeling or it smells a little bad, that’s on you.
  • Your professor, instead of asking you to stand up and say “I am an overprivileged white shit head” will just explain exactly how you are one.

The point is that it cuts both ways. If we are preparing our kids educationally for the “real world” we can’t ignore the basic “struggles” they will face. One of those could be walking a long way in an ice storm to attend a lecture that they care nothing about.

If we pamper our kids now, it only does them a disservice later.

 

Pedestrian Connection Being Built Between Jeremy Ranch and Pinebrook

I heard today from Summit County’s new Transportation Director that work was about to being on a walking/biking connection between Pinebrook and Jeremy Ranch. I don’t have much information other than work should begin in 3-4 weeks, it will initially be an above ground connection, and later it may be a tunnel. This will be a great addition for those of us living in the neighborhood and has to make the Park City Pedestrian woman, who has been fighting for this for years, at least moderately happy.

When I hear more, I’ll let you know.

Provo Is Rebuilding 5 Schools for $100 Million. Park City Gets 1 1/3 Schools for $50 Million

An incensed reader wrote to me about a $108 million school bond approved in Provo late last year. She said, “How in the he** does Provo rebuild 5 schools for $100 million when we get 1 new school and an addition to the High School for $50 million. Are we paying Park City prices for our schools too?”

It does seem interesting. The Provo School District is rebuilding Provo High (about 1650 student) and four elementary schools as part of the project. The high school has 4 wings and they are tearing down and rebuilding one at a time. Each of the elementary schools are being completely torn down and rebuilt.

What’s equally as interesting is why they are rebuilding their schools. It appears most of these schools are 50-60 years old. In the case of Provost Elementary, “an employee goes to work an hour and a half early every Monday morning to turn on the water so it’s not brown when the kids arrive.” In Park City’s case, Treasure Mountain was built in 1983 (32 years old) and was renovated in the late 90’s. We are tearing it down because it is “cursed” and has bad pipes. Reading that, and comparing the two, it makes me feel like we are a bunch of spoiled, rich kids. Incredible.

So, I don’t know what to more upset about. Should I be more upset that we seem to want to tear down a school that has some issues but in the scheme of things probably isn’t that bad, or should I be more upset that we are paying a fortune to do it. I’ll probably just hate the decision for all of the above.

Lest you think Provo is just a bunch of “Choose the Right”ers with awful education, and so they can afford to cheap out on schools, I’ll remind you that Provo has the top high school (Timpview) in Utah according to US News and World Reports. So, they seem to know what they are doing.

There are just so many things that are wrong with the process we are heading down. I’ve been watching the Park City School District Master Planning process since January, so i know how we got to where we are. That said, where we are is starting to look like a very bad place.

The Extra $4 million That You’ll Be On the Hook For

During Wednesday’s Park City School District Master Planning Committee meeting, the subject of moving the 5/6 school to Ecker Hill was talked about. Specifically, traffic was discussed. The Committee Co-Chairman, Rory Murphy, said he wasn’t sure that Summit County should be solely on the hook for fixing any additional traffic issues caused by adding a school at Ecker Hill. A few other members of the Committee said they felt it was Summit County’s problem.

The Planning Company, VCBO, then chimed in that they had just received results of a study that indicated what would alleviate the traffic issues: two roundabouts.

Great. Problem Solved.

Or should I say, another problem created. If I recall the cost of each roundabout when they expanded Kimball Junction (to add Five Guys, Zupas, etc.) was something like $1.5 million to $2 million a piece. In the case of Kimball Junction, the developer had to pay impact fees that covered much of the cost. In this case, it sounds like the School District wants Summit County to pay for that.

Who exactly is Summit County? You are. I am. We all are. Do they (we) have an extra $4 million sitting around? Probably not. What happens when a government needs money they don’t have?

Yep. More taxes.