Harrington Town Hall #2: Fewer New Facts, More Honest Tension
Reminder: Independent parent group — not affiliated with or endorsed by FASD.
TL;DR
The second Harrington town hall did not add much new information about the move itself.
Harrington still appears to be a major facilities upgrade for students, teachers, and staff.
The tone was very different from the first town hall. Parents raised sharper concerns about communication, timing, staffing, and prior commitments.
School leadership emphasized the need to enter the Clayton / Harrington neighborhood with humility and empathy.
A major discussion centered on the Jules Verne program and whether FASD has shifted from the hybrid staffing model described in school documents to an external/local-first model.
The biggest takeaway: a new building may create more space and amenities, but it does not automatically create more trust.
Parent Recap (What We Learned)
FASD held a second town hall about the planned move to Harrington.
Most of the facilities information was familiar. Harrington was again described as larger, more functional, and better suited to elementary-school use than the current building, with more classrooms, air conditioning, a gym, cafeteria, kitchen, library, conference rooms, support spaces, playgrounds, and access to nearby Schaefer Park.
The school also emphasized that a DPS facility should make building costs more predictable and reduce the amount of staff and volunteer time spent dealing with facilities issues.
The tone of the meeting was different from the first town hall. Several parents asked pointed questions about timing, communication, and how families are supposed to absorb major changes announced late in the school year. School leadership acknowledged that the timing was difficult and said the school only received actionable information from DPS the prior Friday.
There was also a thoughtful discussion about entering the Clayton / Harrington community with humility. School leadership noted that the community has experienced school closure, neighborhood change, and loss, and said FASD needs to be careful and respectful in how it shows up.
The most significant discussion was about staffing and the Jules Verne program.
A parent asked about the apparent shift from the school’s hybrid staffing model to the January Board minutes’ statement that Jules Verne would be used for additional visiting teacher positions “after external hires.”
The answer focused on pushing back against the idea that Jules Verne is going away. School leadership said Jules Verne is not being canceled, but also said the program was not intended to staff the whole school and that FASD needs a balanced staffing model.
There was also an amusing hypothetical that if FASD only prioritized Jules Verne teachers, the school might not be able to hire a former French ambassador who later became a teacher.
The school was also asked how many Jules Verne teachers FASD expects next year. The answer was not provided, with leadership citing HR reasons.
The “Since You’re Here…” Section
Unofficial reflections — offered in good faith (and with a grain of salt)
I want to be explicit: the section above is my attempt to keep things factual and balanced. This section is my personal perspective.
The second town hall was useful, but not because it added a lot of new Harrington facts. It was useful because it surfaced the real issue: trust.
The school is understandably excited about Harrington. A better building matters. More space matters. Air conditioning matters. A safer drop-off loop matters. Teachers having real classrooms and support spaces matters.
But families are not only asking, “Is Harrington better?” They are asking, “Can we rely on what the school tells us?”
That is where the Jules Verne discussion matters.
To be clear: I have not said Jules Verne is going away. I have not heard parents say the school announced Jules Verne is going away. The school itself has not said Jules Verne is going away.
That is not the concern.
The concern is that school documents describe a staffing model focused on highly qualified French teachers, including a proposed target that 60–70% of French teachers hold Francophone Ministry of Education certification and that at least 50% at each grade level do so. The Hiring Policy linked in our Charter Agreement with DPS also includes Jules Verne as part of the normal recruitment process.
That model makes sense. It reflects what many families value about FASD: highly qualified French dual-immersion teachers who know, understand, and can effectively teach the French Ministry curriculum that is central to the school’s identity, taught by the kind of highly qualified French educators that underpin its LabelFrancÉducation designation.
But the Board’s January minutes say Jules Verne will be used for additional visiting teacher positions “after external hires.”
That sounds different. That sounds like a sequence: external/local hires first, Jules Verne after. If that is the school’s staffing model, families deserve more than a conversation about “misinformation.” They deserve governance.
There are not many teachers in Colorado who are native or near-native French speakers, trained in the French educational system, experienced in elementary immersion, and able to teach the French Ministry curriculum. That scarcity was one of the leading rationales for the bell schedule change: FASD needed to improve teacher retention and make the school more sustainable for high-quality French immersion staff.
Now families are hearing that qualified visiting teachers may be a lower priority because of operational challenges, visa processing, and turnover risk. Those challenges are real. Helping visiting teachers relocate is hard. Visa processing is hard. Turnover is hard. Staffing a dual-language school is hard.
But the answer cannot simply be to make the staffing model easier to operate if that model is not clearly aligned with the charter, the Hiring Policy, or the Board’s formally adopted direction.
We want what is best for students, not simply what is easiest operationally.
The refusal to share even an aggregate count of expected Jules Verne teachers for next year also did not help. Individual personnel decisions and visa statuses are private. But a general staffing overview should be possible without naming teachers or disclosing private information.
And this is where the broader pattern comes in.
Past commitments are not just misunderstandings.
Some are written in formal documents, like the Hiring Policy and charter-aligned staffing model. Some are part of the school’s historical fabric, like manageable kindergarten class sizes, the French academic model, and the role Jules Verne has played in FASD’s identity.
Circumstances can change. Schools grow. Budgets get tighter. Staffing realities are hard. A new building creates new possibilities.
But when prior commitments change, the school needs to name the change, explain the reason, and bring it through proper governance. At least with kindergarten class sizes, the Board voted. Families may disagree with the decision, but there was a decision.
With the staffing model, the shift appears to have shown up in a School Director report-out in January. That is not the same thing as a clearly debated and adopted Board direction.
A Few Constructive Suggestions
These town halls were imperfect, but they were also helpful. Families asked real questions. Some answers were useful. Some were incomplete. But the format was better than the usual pattern of controlled announcements, FAQs, and public comment after decisions have already been made.
A few suggestions for the school and Board:
Lean into empathy — consistently.
The school spoke thoughtfully about entering the Clayton / Harrington community with humility. That is good. Apply that same empathy to current families navigating a sudden commute change, families who relied on prior commitments, teachers living through another transition, and community members who feel managed rather than treated as partners.Be transparent about both opportunities and risks.
Harrington may be a major win. Say that. But families do not need apple-pie-and-puppy-dog narratives. They need the real picture: what is known, what is not known, what is exciting, what is difficult, what will cost money, and what still needs to be worked out.Keep holding Board-community town halls.
Being on the hot seat is not always pleasant, and I sincerely applaud the Board members for showing up. These town halls were helpful. The Board will be more effective if it knows what is actually on families’ minds. No one should expect to be pleased all the time. But being heard is a meaningful step toward rebuilding trust.
Harrington may solve the space problem. It will not, by itself, solve the trust problem.
That work still has to be done.
~ Greg
PS: Parent input still matters
The independent parent survey asks directly about staffing models, communication, governance, academics, culture, facilities, and what families want FASD to prioritize as the strategic plan is refreshed.
If you haven’t done so, you can take independent parent survey here: [Independent Parent Survey]
