PPS “Rightsizing” Info

En Español

**Please check back for updates**

Sign up for our Newsletter

James John is slated for closure under both scenarios proposed by PPS as part of the “rightsizing” process. Our school is the heart of our community, and we only have a short amount of time to speak up and make our voices heard.

Why oppose the “Rightsizing” Plan?

PPS says right-sizing is intended to address declining enrollment, building utilization, costs, sustainable facilities, well-resourced schools, and equity and access. Those are legitimate issues. Our argument is that closing James John and dividing our community does not solve those problems.

PPS is asking for feedback right now. Here are 11 points PPS needs to hear from us and answer:

1. Enrollment — PPS cites declining enrollment as a fundamental reason for “right-sizing”. Yet James John’s enrollment declined just 9.8% over seven years vs. roughly 20% districtwide—less than half the district decline. Why close one that has substantially outperformed the district’s enrollment trend?

2. Building utilization — PPS identifies underutilized buildings as one of the problems right-sizing is intended to address. Yet James John is operating at approximately 71% capacity. If underutilization is part of the justification, why is a school operating in the upper half of the district and at more than 70% capacity being targeted for closure?

3. Equity — James John is a Title I school with approximately 68% non-white enrollment. PPS says its decisions should center students most impacted by inequities. How does removing a neighborhood school from a historically underserved, working-class community where 70% of the students live within walking distance, advance that goal?

4. JJES is expensive to maintain and needs seismic upgrades — We recognize that PPS faces real financial challenges. However, before asking families and an entire neighborhood to absorb the consequences of a closure, PPS should clearly demonstrate how much money closing James John actually saves. PPS has cited JJES has approximately $18 million in seismic needs, but its own records show seismic improvements have already been completed. What work actually remains? What does it cost? How much would closing JJES truly save after accounting for transition costs? Its annual operating cost ranks #9 in the district—not an outlier—and these costs should be considered within PPS’s much larger district-wide facilities needs and budget.

5. The complete cost of closure —  The current A and B proposals do not account for any on-going costs that follow the student. A true calculation of “savings” needs to include the full cost created by the closure: additional transportation, transition expenses, receiving-school costs, program relocation, facility modifications, ongoing maintenance, and other expenses created by consolidation. PPS should provide a complete financial analysis showing the net long-term savings—not simply the costs it eliminates.

6. Class size and consolidation — James John and Sitton—the schools PPS proposes consolidating—are both operating at more than 70% capacity and have similar enrollment trends. Combining these school populations raises important questions about classroom sizes, available space, learning environments, and teacher workload. 

7. PPS’s own “sustainability” benchmark — PPS identifies 360 students as its sustainability threshold for a K–5 school. James John is 7 away from that threshold and its enrollment has been growing. If James John is approaching PPS’s own sustainability benchmark rather than moving away from it, why close it now?

8. Geography and transportation — St. Johns’ location on the peninsula already limits school options. Sending students farther from their neighborhood creates additional transportation, childcare, scheduling, and commute burdens—particularly for families with fewer resources to absorb them. Has PPS adequately accounted for the unique geography of St. Johns and the burden its proposal places on families? 

9. Spanish Dual Language Immersion (DLI) — Both A and B scenarios move JJES and Sitton’s Spanish DLI program to Cesar Chavez, raising concerns about equitable access, travel time, and breaking apart the community that has developed around the program and these families.

10. The broader St. Johns community — What consideration has PPS given to the broader economic impact of removing a major public institution from the heart of St. Johns? Will our businesses survive?

11. One sided equation  — Why are they only looking at costs and cutting? What work is PPS doing to identify new intergovernmental agreements, grants, partnerships, or other revenue sources—and why aren’t those opportunities being presented alongside proposed closures? Does closing six Title I schools impact federal funding?

Show up in person

*Dates & times of PPS events may be subject to change. Please verify event specifics on the PPS website*

Mon, Oct 26: Community Voice: Native Families, 6:00–8:00 PM, Barbie’s Village (935 NE 33rd Ave)

Tue, Oct 27: Board of Education Community Connection, 6:00–8:00 PM, Lincoln High School

Wed, Oct 28: “Rightsizing” Conversation with PPS Superintendent Dr. Kimberlee Armstrong, 1:30-3:00 PM, James John Auditorium

Wed, Oct 28: Board of Education Community Connection, 6:00–8:00 PM, virtual

Wed, Nov 4: Attend the PPS Board Meeting, 501 N Dixon St., 6pm

Thu, Nov 12: PTA Engagement Session, 5:30-7:00 PM, James John Auditorium – Meeting will include opportunities to ask questions and hear directly from PPS Board of Education Directors Stephanie Engelsman and Virginia LaForte.

Tue, Nov 17: School Board Meeting, 6:00-8:00 PM, 501 N Dixon St.

Wed, Nov 18: Board of Education Public Listening Session, 5:00-6:00 PM, Cleveland @ Marshall High School (and virtual)

Thu, Nov 19: James John PTA General Meeting, 5:30-7:00 PM, James John Auditorium

Write to our school board and other local elected officials
Suggested Language (feel free to edit)

I am a parent of a student at James John Elementary School, and I am strongly opposed to the current rightsizing scenarios that propose closing our school. James John is the heart of our community, both geographically and socially. It is located in the core of the St Johns neighborhood, between our local commercial district, library, and community center. Closing James John would leave a massive void on our main street, which would be devastating for our neighborhood as a whole. 

The critical role James John plays in the St Johns community is borne out by the data. James John is one of the few elementary schools in North Portland that has enrollment numbers in line with the “sustainable school” threshold of 360 elementary students identified by PPS, and has one of the highest capture rates for neighborhood students attending their location schools in North Portland (most recent PPS data).

I also believe that the single rightsizing scenario proposed for North Portland is contrary to PPS’s stated equity principles. The neighborhood schools in North Portland have some of the most diverse student populations in Portland, and some of the largest Latino student populations. The Spanish DLI programs hosted at our neighborhood schools (including James John, Sitton, Caeser Chavez, and Beach) build community across language barriers for students and families both in and out of the DLI classrooms. Removing these programs from our neighborhood schools  would segregate our existing communities based on language and would make it harder for our underserved populations to access these valuable programs. 

I urge you to vote against the proposed rightsizing scenarios, including closure of James John Elementary School.

Thank you,

NAME.

Resources

PPS Survey: Right for Students

Proposed “Rightsizing” scenarios

PPS “Rightsizing” website

Connect with our community

RSVP for a PAT Save Our Schools Summit: RSVP

Save Portland’s Schools Petition: Save Portland’s Schools

Change.org Petition: https://www.change.org/p/save-james-john-elementary-school

PAT Petition: https://secure.ngpvan.com/XyC1n1LFiUCZyZlHBtyEYA2