So someone might open a school in Biscayne Park. Or someone will open a school in BP. At best, it kind of remains to be seen. Let's take it at best. For now.
BP was incorporated in 1933. The Church of the Resurrection was built in 1940. So it wasn't here from the outset, but it's been here a long time. Biscayne Park is almost 100% residential. If "commercial" implies signs and parking, then we only have one official non-residential phenomenon. The Church. I really don't know the history of this Episcopal Church. When I moved here in July, 2005, it was gasping for air. Last gasps, maybe. Apparently, no one much attended church there. The Episcopal Diocese doesn't confide in me, so I don't know what they were thinking to do about this. Sometimes, churches or temples close down for lack of a congregation. I have no idea if this idea crossed the Monsignor's mind. But what did happen is that the reportedly adorable Father Cutie became available, the Episcopals picked up his option from the Catholics, and it seemed some life might be breathed into the little 'ol CoR. Right, it seemed like it.
But evidently not life enough. So we got a new proposal from the Church this month. They've apparently been in talks with the Mater Academy (pronounced matter, spells like the Latin for mother, although all those involved claim no religious affiliation or theme. OK.) about a Charter School, which is apparently what Mater does. We heard preK-8, then preK-5, then preK-2. We heard 180 kids and a new two storey building, and we heard 50-60 kids and just upgrading what they have. We heard August, 2011 (yeah, this August, as in about a month from now), and we heard maybe not so soon. So who knows. The only thing we do know is that there is a plan, and the plan is to provide the Church with money, and Mater Academy with another outlet. Somewhere along the way, there was some vague allusion about what this is supposed to do for the Village and residents of Biscayne Park. And we need to discuss this.
But first, let's consider a school at the corner of 6th and Griffing. It's our extreme southern corner. Think what's just over the 6th Avenue bridge from there. There's Miami Country Day School. Another two blocks down the street, there's a public elementary school. Nearby, there's St Rose, and a Montessori school. Several blocks west on 103rd, there's another elementary school. A mile north and east, and it's WJ Bryan. A little closer than that, there's another school. So there needs to be another elementary school? Among seven elementary or earlier schools, all within a few miles of each other, we need another? And it should be in Biscayne Park, which normally distinguishes itself by being (almost 100%) residential? The other schools are not all free, and they're not all A+ quality, but they're quite servicable to our community, and we've relied on them for decades. It wouldn't be hard to conclude that the anomaly is not that we don't have a school in BP, but that we have anything at all other than homes. The anomaly is the church, not the absence of a Charter school. By definition, the church is not in itself a going concern. It needs to take in boarders to stay afloat. If BP'ers, or anyone, valued the church as a place to worship, it would have an adequate congregation, and we wouldn't be having this conversation. We need one less church, not one more school.
But let's be fair, and consider pros and cons. The cons of a school, compounding a church: it creates more traffic at an already difficult intersection, it expands the very limited non-residential feature of BP, which we say we don't want, and it revives a church that appears to have had inadequate value in this neighborhood for what it was. The pros of a school here: it gives BP kids of a certain age a place to go to school, right in their own neighborhood, and (I've heard this), it clogs up a difficult intersection, so "cut-throughs" won't use it for commuting. In that sense, it cures one traffic problem by superimposing another. As for providing a school for BP kids and employees' kids, is it a big advantage to have such a school a couple of blocks or so closer than the usual alternatives? And do we have enough kids, on a successive basis, to make use of such an advantage?
Now before I say what I'm thinking, I have to throw a major monkey wrench into this. Our Village Attorney, John Hearn, was probably strategic and careful in letting slip that the State, under its strengthened right-wing regime, has declared that charter schools do not have to comply with the usual rules regarding zoning, if they are within certain other properties, like churches. They also are exempt from paying for building permits. In short, the church can do whatever it wants with respect to hosting a school, even a secular school, on its property. School and church representatives came to the Commission meeting, and made a humble proposal as a show of diplomacy, not because they are in any way constrained by what the Village and its residents want. The Monsignor said, in a Herald Neighbors article yesterday, that "all...issues are resolvable," and that church and school are "more than willing to bend over backwards to accommodate the Village," but the fact is they can do what they want. They are under no requirement, or real pressure, to accommodate anyone. Several Village residents commented about the plan for a school, and every one of them spoke against the idea. Is the church/school willing to bend so far backwards that they would decide against the idea of a school if Village residents didn't want one? The plan is for a "workshop," to further consider the matter, but this could all be a formality. We will have to see. The church was openly accused of not having been a "good neighbor" to the Village, and it has the authority to be as bad a neighbor as it wishes.
What I'm thinking is this: the church wants to remain a church. It can't manage for itself, so it wants to rent its grounds to a school. Sounds like typical business considerations to me. And no problem. But is there really any reason all of this should happen in Biscayne Park? The Park, as a potential congregation, has made clear it isn't interested in the church end of this. We have a surfeit of schools, more than conveniently located for Park residents. So why don't we offer to buy the church and its grounds from the church, they can go a block or two over the bridge, and there, in a perfectly consonant surroundings, they can rebuild a church, and outfit it to accommodate a school. This part of town will have a veritable ample garden of schools: all the choice in the world for kids not yet of high school age. And we can sell off the lots for homes, which is what we prefer ("Biscayne Park: The Village of Homes"). We will convert the lots from occupants who pay no property tax to occupants who pay property tax. Which we also need. This way, everyone is satisfied.
The church and its intended tenant came to us in seeming honor, to ask for our opinion, or perhaps blessing (?). Both of them clearly want this affiliation, it's clear why, and they might want us to accept their plan. Thus far, we have made it clear we don't want what they want. At a "workshop," we might make it even more clear, or perhaps those of us who come to the workshop will wind up feeling more hospitable. But the question is, if the church/school clearly want the school, and the Village clearly doesn't, what happens? Does the trump card up the church's sleeve get played? We shall surely see.
No comments:
Post a Comment