As I was pondering this question, the answer of course was right in front of my face. The answer actually came to me last week during my interview with Jann Murray-Garcia.
Some people have used the closing of Valley Oak as an excuse to vote against the parcel tax. However, I think they have it backwards. You see, no one supported keeping Valley Oak open more than I did. I will match my 70 articles on or about Valley Oak, the late night meetings, the special coverage, against anyone’s passion. Unless you sat on Davis OPEN itself, you will not win. And even then, I’ll take it to a tie unless you are a certain dragon and the lovely lady who stands inside there come rain, heat, or fog.
No folks, if you believe in Valley Oak and the Valley Oaks of the world, you need to support the parcel tax. If you are worried about the achievement gap, then you need to support the parcel tax. If you do not want future parents to anguish over what school their kids will go to, then you need to support the parcel tax.
You see, unfortunately, and I am not casting aspersions at anyone, it’s just the way things are right now, but when the economy goes south, when funding gets tight, the first things that go are funding to special programs and unfortunately by special programs I mean minority schools in Davis.
When I first saw the budget cuts list last winter, one of the things that drew my attention was cutting the climate coordinator position. I have been critical of the climate coordinator. But I also know how hard and how long people struggled to get that position created in the first place. The Human Relations Commission had a townhall meeting with former Superintendent David Murphy on the issue of bullying and racism, hundreds of parents came, students came forward with horror stories, it took a lot of work. Superintendent Murphy was at times intransigent. But in the end, the HRC and the community won out.
And now it was going to be gone in one fell swoop. It is not because the position is not important, it is not because the school board was against having the position, it is simply that when you have a choice because cutting elementary school science and the climate coordinator, it is not really much of a debate. And yet I know full well why that position was created in the first place and it will hurt a lot of kids if it is canceled.
I remember the meeting in 2007 when they were discussing the report from the Achievement Gap Task force and their recommendations, and how Tansey Thomas stood up and pointed out a very similar report from 1990 that was put on the shelf as soon as passions cooled and times got tough. I remember that in 2007, every single candidate running for the board brought up that as one of their goals–to help close the achievement gap. I do not know if I have heard the word uttered in 2008 and you know why? Because they are fighting to keep from firing 100 teachers.
At the end of the day, I believe in my heart of hearts that when budget times get tough, the first people to suffer are those who can least afford to suffer. Those who are the most vulnerable. It happens in all walks of life. The people who suffer the most are the most recent ones hired, those at the bottom end of the totem pole, those who are least able to create a safety net.
In Davis, I believe that the children of affluent middle class backgrounds will thrive regardless of whether or not the parcel tax passes. Are they better off with better schools with more challenging programs? Of course. However, they will prosper regardless. It is the children of those who are less fortunate who will not prosper under more difficult times with programs cut. These are the most vulnerable kids. These will be the ones to suffer the most. The children who go to the Valley Oaks of the world who had a school where they were thriving only to see it closed due to budget considerations. And yes, I am convinced that there are other schools that are very good in this district, but I do not believe you can replace that sense of empowerment and sense of community that was at work at Valley Oak Elementary School.
And though Valley Oak is now closed until further notice, there is still much to fight to protect, which is why I cannot in good conscience punish other children for mistakes made by the school board.
People have talked about fiscal mismanagement as a reason to vote against the parcel tax. I know something about fiscal mismanagement in this district as I spent a good four or five months researching what had happened in the district under Superintendent David Murphy and Budget Officer Tahir Ahad.
A few things about that I want to share. The first thing is that I did this investigation with full and complete cooperation from the school district and several of the board members. This investigation would not have been possible without their assistance. Moreover, the district went above and beyond the call of duty in assisting me. They absolutely wanted the public to know exactly what had happened under the previous administration. Two of the board members went on the record to discuss it with me.
The second thing is that the new school board, elected in 2005, cleaned up most of the problems that had occurred under the previous administration. Tahir Ahad left the district and eventually was replaced by Bruce Colby as the new chief budget officer. David Murphy left the district and eventually was replaced by James Hammond as the new superintendent. Frankly, James Hammond alone is reason to vote for this parcel tax, I cannot think of a better person to do this job than Dr. Hammond. I talked to him the day after the board decided not to support him on the charter school and all he could talk about was how sorry he was that he did not have another week to convince them to take the chance on it. He was genuine about that loss. No blame, no political posturing, just sincere compassion for those students.
The fiscal problems in this district are not the result of the actions of the current board. Not one single member of this board was around when the decision was made to put the facilities bond on the ballot. Not one single member of this board was there when the decision was made to hire Tahir Ahad or David Murphy for that matter. And not one single member of this board was there when the deadline was missed for matching funds to Montgomery.
But the majority of this board was in place when every single one of the FCMAT recommendations were carried out, when a new CBO and Superintendent were hired, when the Montgomery funding was rescued by a concerted and joint effort of the board and the interim Superintendent, when the fiscal ship of this district was righted. This board deserves the trust of the voters in handling the taxpayers money and giving the board the resources to continue to make this district one of the best in the state.
Finally folks, people are complaining about raising taxes again, one year after the previous parcel tax was passed. People are complaining that the number is $120 rather than $80 which would have been more likely to pass. I can appreciate both of those concerns.
However as far as the $120 goes, the district is asking for the amount of money that they believe they need in order to continue to fund the programs that have been listed here.
I have been critical of the city’s overindulgence of certain public employee salaries and t he risk of raising more taxes to pay for their fiscal irresponsibility. Moreover, the amount of money people will pay in water rate hikes will dwarf the meager $120 annual tax increase. We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes compared with $120 per year for the parcel tax. This is on top of other fees, taxes, and possible rate hikes. There is really no comparison. Moreover, if I am going to pay out more money, I would choose to give money to help children be educated and help teachers earn a better living. Those are my priorities.
My biggest fear in all of this is that people may use the wrong reasons to not support education in Davis. It is not the children’s fault that the previous administration made a series of very serious errors. It is not their fault that you may feel overburdened in your taxes, overwhelmed by a poor economy, a bad housing market, high fuel prices, etc. I understand all of that. But at the end of the day once again, we only get one shot at educating the youth in this community, they get only one shot at childhood, and for some kids, they need all the help they can get.
I hope for their sake and theirs alone you will consider supporting this tax as a modest investment into the future of these children, this community and this country.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
“We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes”
STOP SAYING THIS! You have no basis for it.
Other than that, an excellent editorial. I have been looking over the facts and figures available from the school district and will comment more on the specifics shortly. But I would like to say that the district has been very forthcoming with the figures and is making an effort to have the information available and understandable.
“We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes”
STOP SAYING THIS! You have no basis for it.
Other than that, an excellent editorial. I have been looking over the facts and figures available from the school district and will comment more on the specifics shortly. But I would like to say that the district has been very forthcoming with the figures and is making an effort to have the information available and understandable.
“We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes”
STOP SAYING THIS! You have no basis for it.
Other than that, an excellent editorial. I have been looking over the facts and figures available from the school district and will comment more on the specifics shortly. But I would like to say that the district has been very forthcoming with the figures and is making an effort to have the information available and understandable.
“We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes”
STOP SAYING THIS! You have no basis for it.
Other than that, an excellent editorial. I have been looking over the facts and figures available from the school district and will comment more on the specifics shortly. But I would like to say that the district has been very forthcoming with the figures and is making an effort to have the information available and understandable.
Actions speak louder than blogs….
So,
How does one contribute and/or help
on Measure W?
The website in ballot arguments seems to be down at this point.
Actions speak louder than blogs….
So,
How does one contribute and/or help
on Measure W?
The website in ballot arguments seems to be down at this point.
Actions speak louder than blogs….
So,
How does one contribute and/or help
on Measure W?
The website in ballot arguments seems to be down at this point.
Actions speak louder than blogs….
So,
How does one contribute and/or help
on Measure W?
The website in ballot arguments seems to be down at this point.
Re helping with Measure W, they are accepting donations for the campaign and volunteers for phone banking. You can contact:
Kingsley Melton
Campaign Coordinator
Measure W
cell: 530-867-0641
Re helping with Measure W, they are accepting donations for the campaign and volunteers for phone banking. You can contact:
Kingsley Melton
Campaign Coordinator
Measure W
cell: 530-867-0641
Re helping with Measure W, they are accepting donations for the campaign and volunteers for phone banking. You can contact:
Kingsley Melton
Campaign Coordinator
Measure W
cell: 530-867-0641
Re helping with Measure W, they are accepting donations for the campaign and volunteers for phone banking. You can contact:
Kingsley Melton
Campaign Coordinator
Measure W
cell: 530-867-0641
Kingsley’s email is:
meltonkl@yahoo.com
Kingsley’s email is:
meltonkl@yahoo.com
Kingsley’s email is:
meltonkl@yahoo.com
Kingsley’s email is:
meltonkl@yahoo.com
Don said:
“We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes”
STOP SAYING THIS! You have no basis for it.
Please clarify. It seems that we are looking at a substantial hike in water rates, and it looks like it will be more than Measure W proposes.
Maybe it’s not appropriate to discuss specific numbers at the moment, but it seems like it will be a lot.
Don said:
“We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes”
STOP SAYING THIS! You have no basis for it.
Please clarify. It seems that we are looking at a substantial hike in water rates, and it looks like it will be more than Measure W proposes.
Maybe it’s not appropriate to discuss specific numbers at the moment, but it seems like it will be a lot.
Don said:
“We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes”
STOP SAYING THIS! You have no basis for it.
Please clarify. It seems that we are looking at a substantial hike in water rates, and it looks like it will be more than Measure W proposes.
Maybe it’s not appropriate to discuss specific numbers at the moment, but it seems like it will be a lot.
Don said:
“We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes”
STOP SAYING THIS! You have no basis for it.
Please clarify. It seems that we are looking at a substantial hike in water rates, and it looks like it will be more than Measure W proposes.
Maybe it’s not appropriate to discuss specific numbers at the moment, but it seems like it will be a lot.
I would point out that Measure W will allow the district to collect other additional funds, if passed.
The state provides certain funds for efforts to maintain lower class sizes for 9th and 10th grade English and Math. State funds do not fully cover the staffing to achieve the required lower class sizes. Measure W supplement what is needed to get those state funds.
I would point out that Measure W will allow the district to collect other additional funds, if passed.
The state provides certain funds for efforts to maintain lower class sizes for 9th and 10th grade English and Math. State funds do not fully cover the staffing to achieve the required lower class sizes. Measure W supplement what is needed to get those state funds.
I would point out that Measure W will allow the district to collect other additional funds, if passed.
The state provides certain funds for efforts to maintain lower class sizes for 9th and 10th grade English and Math. State funds do not fully cover the staffing to achieve the required lower class sizes. Measure W supplement what is needed to get those state funds.
I would point out that Measure W will allow the district to collect other additional funds, if passed.
The state provides certain funds for efforts to maintain lower class sizes for 9th and 10th grade English and Math. State funds do not fully cover the staffing to achieve the required lower class sizes. Measure W supplement what is needed to get those state funds.
“Please clarify. It seems that we are looking at a substantial hike in water rates, and it looks like it will be more than Measure W proposes.
Maybe it’s not appropriate to discuss specific numbers at the moment, but it seems like it will be a lot.”
I have watched this number, which has no substantiation, increase from $100 a month to $200 a month, sometimes per household, sometimes per person.
There is no basis for it. Nobody has provided any credible evidence that water rates will go up by that amount.
Of course they will go up by some amount. Public Works in Woodland and Davis have made projections, which you can debate if you choose. But this $100/$200 number keeps getting repeated and magnified on this blog as though it were fact. It isn’t.
But let’s keep that discussion for the next thread on the water project.
“Please clarify. It seems that we are looking at a substantial hike in water rates, and it looks like it will be more than Measure W proposes.
Maybe it’s not appropriate to discuss specific numbers at the moment, but it seems like it will be a lot.”
I have watched this number, which has no substantiation, increase from $100 a month to $200 a month, sometimes per household, sometimes per person.
There is no basis for it. Nobody has provided any credible evidence that water rates will go up by that amount.
Of course they will go up by some amount. Public Works in Woodland and Davis have made projections, which you can debate if you choose. But this $100/$200 number keeps getting repeated and magnified on this blog as though it were fact. It isn’t.
But let’s keep that discussion for the next thread on the water project.
“Please clarify. It seems that we are looking at a substantial hike in water rates, and it looks like it will be more than Measure W proposes.
Maybe it’s not appropriate to discuss specific numbers at the moment, but it seems like it will be a lot.”
I have watched this number, which has no substantiation, increase from $100 a month to $200 a month, sometimes per household, sometimes per person.
There is no basis for it. Nobody has provided any credible evidence that water rates will go up by that amount.
Of course they will go up by some amount. Public Works in Woodland and Davis have made projections, which you can debate if you choose. But this $100/$200 number keeps getting repeated and magnified on this blog as though it were fact. It isn’t.
But let’s keep that discussion for the next thread on the water project.
“Please clarify. It seems that we are looking at a substantial hike in water rates, and it looks like it will be more than Measure W proposes.
Maybe it’s not appropriate to discuss specific numbers at the moment, but it seems like it will be a lot.”
I have watched this number, which has no substantiation, increase from $100 a month to $200 a month, sometimes per household, sometimes per person.
There is no basis for it. Nobody has provided any credible evidence that water rates will go up by that amount.
Of course they will go up by some amount. Public Works in Woodland and Davis have made projections, which you can debate if you choose. But this $100/$200 number keeps getting repeated and magnified on this blog as though it were fact. It isn’t.
But let’s keep that discussion for the next thread on the water project.
Let me explain why a lot of us cannot agree with your assessment DPD:
1) Valley Oak was not closed because of budget cuts as you propound. Valley Oak was closed before the state budget cuts hit. Ostensibly it was closed due to “declining enrollment”. But guess what? Enrollment at the elementary school level is up 75 students. The School District/Board got it wrong – yet again.
2) A climate coordinator would not have helped the bullying problem. My son went through hell all of his years in Davis schools. It takes a united front, a committed administration. When you have leaders of gangs living with the vice principal, no climate coordinator is going to help. When you have teachers that look the other way at bullying, who do not control their classrooms, that tell bullied students if they complain one more time they are going to get expelled, no climate coordinator is going to be able to control a pervasive atmosphere of drug deals in the open, assaults in the classroom, administrators working on advanced degrees who are not minding the store, etc, etc, etc. Do you really think a climate coordinator was going to get at the root problem of the bullying, which is a faculty and administration that are asleep at the switch? Dream on.
3) If the Achievement Gap Task Force identified the problems of minority and low income children back in 1990, and those same problems still exist despite all the money we have funneled into parcel taxes to solve the problem, then the faculty and administration do not have the will to do a damn thing about this issue. Another parcel tax will not be used to fix the problem. Instead, it will be used to keep music, art, after school athletics, Mandarin Chinese 4, Da Vinci, all the boutique programs alive – while the best EL program in Davis at Valley Oak was axed with very little fanfare. More money will not assist those truly in need – it will continue to be funneled to the kids that need it the least.
4) Sure the School Bd/District assisted you. They wanted to be able to wash their hands of past malfeasance, which they did vociferously. Yet it is members of this School Board who closed Valley Oak by refusing to allow it to continue as a charter school, even against the advice of their own Supt. It is this School Board that argued closing Valley Oak would be good for minority students, bc it would spread them out instead of concentrating them (Susan Lovenburg). It is this School Board that tried to close Emerson. It is this School Board that claimed the lower pass rate of the last parcel tax was because the voters just didn’t understand and needed more “educating” – as if the public were dumb bunnies incapable of understanding basic issues.
IMHO, it is the School Board/District that needs the education. They have squandered money with abandon; turned to taxpayers to bail them out; refuse to define “core curricula” because there is not a single program they have developed that is considered anything but essential; have ducked true accountability; have put nothing in place to guarantee that too many schools will not be built ever again, etc., etc. etc. ad nauseum.
DPD, the fallacy of your arguments is that you assume money is the solution to problems. Often it is not. I would gladly vote for Measure W if I thought it would really address the underlying problems in our schools. But I have absolutely no faith it will. There is a cancerous growth in our schools, that takes ever and ever increasing amounts of money to fund boutique curricula, while virtually leaving the real problems unaddressed.
The School Board/District has convinced you otherwise. However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times. Parents are treated w absolute arrogance, as are students. There is an underlying corrossive atmosphere that is counterproductive to learning.
While students at the high school had to walk between classes in the rain, slogging through huge puddles bc the roof drainage was not addressed, while students had to share tiny lockers insufficient to hold books, the administration built itself a huge building to house their fancy offices. This is a typical example of how much our Davis school system cares about its students.
I have not seen any change thus far in how our schools do business. How much did they spend on a consultant, to turn around and ignore his advice. It is disgustingly just more of the same.
Let me explain why a lot of us cannot agree with your assessment DPD:
1) Valley Oak was not closed because of budget cuts as you propound. Valley Oak was closed before the state budget cuts hit. Ostensibly it was closed due to “declining enrollment”. But guess what? Enrollment at the elementary school level is up 75 students. The School District/Board got it wrong – yet again.
2) A climate coordinator would not have helped the bullying problem. My son went through hell all of his years in Davis schools. It takes a united front, a committed administration. When you have leaders of gangs living with the vice principal, no climate coordinator is going to help. When you have teachers that look the other way at bullying, who do not control their classrooms, that tell bullied students if they complain one more time they are going to get expelled, no climate coordinator is going to be able to control a pervasive atmosphere of drug deals in the open, assaults in the classroom, administrators working on advanced degrees who are not minding the store, etc, etc, etc. Do you really think a climate coordinator was going to get at the root problem of the bullying, which is a faculty and administration that are asleep at the switch? Dream on.
3) If the Achievement Gap Task Force identified the problems of minority and low income children back in 1990, and those same problems still exist despite all the money we have funneled into parcel taxes to solve the problem, then the faculty and administration do not have the will to do a damn thing about this issue. Another parcel tax will not be used to fix the problem. Instead, it will be used to keep music, art, after school athletics, Mandarin Chinese 4, Da Vinci, all the boutique programs alive – while the best EL program in Davis at Valley Oak was axed with very little fanfare. More money will not assist those truly in need – it will continue to be funneled to the kids that need it the least.
4) Sure the School Bd/District assisted you. They wanted to be able to wash their hands of past malfeasance, which they did vociferously. Yet it is members of this School Board who closed Valley Oak by refusing to allow it to continue as a charter school, even against the advice of their own Supt. It is this School Board that argued closing Valley Oak would be good for minority students, bc it would spread them out instead of concentrating them (Susan Lovenburg). It is this School Board that tried to close Emerson. It is this School Board that claimed the lower pass rate of the last parcel tax was because the voters just didn’t understand and needed more “educating” – as if the public were dumb bunnies incapable of understanding basic issues.
IMHO, it is the School Board/District that needs the education. They have squandered money with abandon; turned to taxpayers to bail them out; refuse to define “core curricula” because there is not a single program they have developed that is considered anything but essential; have ducked true accountability; have put nothing in place to guarantee that too many schools will not be built ever again, etc., etc. etc. ad nauseum.
DPD, the fallacy of your arguments is that you assume money is the solution to problems. Often it is not. I would gladly vote for Measure W if I thought it would really address the underlying problems in our schools. But I have absolutely no faith it will. There is a cancerous growth in our schools, that takes ever and ever increasing amounts of money to fund boutique curricula, while virtually leaving the real problems unaddressed.
The School Board/District has convinced you otherwise. However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times. Parents are treated w absolute arrogance, as are students. There is an underlying corrossive atmosphere that is counterproductive to learning.
While students at the high school had to walk between classes in the rain, slogging through huge puddles bc the roof drainage was not addressed, while students had to share tiny lockers insufficient to hold books, the administration built itself a huge building to house their fancy offices. This is a typical example of how much our Davis school system cares about its students.
I have not seen any change thus far in how our schools do business. How much did they spend on a consultant, to turn around and ignore his advice. It is disgustingly just more of the same.
Let me explain why a lot of us cannot agree with your assessment DPD:
1) Valley Oak was not closed because of budget cuts as you propound. Valley Oak was closed before the state budget cuts hit. Ostensibly it was closed due to “declining enrollment”. But guess what? Enrollment at the elementary school level is up 75 students. The School District/Board got it wrong – yet again.
2) A climate coordinator would not have helped the bullying problem. My son went through hell all of his years in Davis schools. It takes a united front, a committed administration. When you have leaders of gangs living with the vice principal, no climate coordinator is going to help. When you have teachers that look the other way at bullying, who do not control their classrooms, that tell bullied students if they complain one more time they are going to get expelled, no climate coordinator is going to be able to control a pervasive atmosphere of drug deals in the open, assaults in the classroom, administrators working on advanced degrees who are not minding the store, etc, etc, etc. Do you really think a climate coordinator was going to get at the root problem of the bullying, which is a faculty and administration that are asleep at the switch? Dream on.
3) If the Achievement Gap Task Force identified the problems of minority and low income children back in 1990, and those same problems still exist despite all the money we have funneled into parcel taxes to solve the problem, then the faculty and administration do not have the will to do a damn thing about this issue. Another parcel tax will not be used to fix the problem. Instead, it will be used to keep music, art, after school athletics, Mandarin Chinese 4, Da Vinci, all the boutique programs alive – while the best EL program in Davis at Valley Oak was axed with very little fanfare. More money will not assist those truly in need – it will continue to be funneled to the kids that need it the least.
4) Sure the School Bd/District assisted you. They wanted to be able to wash their hands of past malfeasance, which they did vociferously. Yet it is members of this School Board who closed Valley Oak by refusing to allow it to continue as a charter school, even against the advice of their own Supt. It is this School Board that argued closing Valley Oak would be good for minority students, bc it would spread them out instead of concentrating them (Susan Lovenburg). It is this School Board that tried to close Emerson. It is this School Board that claimed the lower pass rate of the last parcel tax was because the voters just didn’t understand and needed more “educating” – as if the public were dumb bunnies incapable of understanding basic issues.
IMHO, it is the School Board/District that needs the education. They have squandered money with abandon; turned to taxpayers to bail them out; refuse to define “core curricula” because there is not a single program they have developed that is considered anything but essential; have ducked true accountability; have put nothing in place to guarantee that too many schools will not be built ever again, etc., etc. etc. ad nauseum.
DPD, the fallacy of your arguments is that you assume money is the solution to problems. Often it is not. I would gladly vote for Measure W if I thought it would really address the underlying problems in our schools. But I have absolutely no faith it will. There is a cancerous growth in our schools, that takes ever and ever increasing amounts of money to fund boutique curricula, while virtually leaving the real problems unaddressed.
The School Board/District has convinced you otherwise. However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times. Parents are treated w absolute arrogance, as are students. There is an underlying corrossive atmosphere that is counterproductive to learning.
While students at the high school had to walk between classes in the rain, slogging through huge puddles bc the roof drainage was not addressed, while students had to share tiny lockers insufficient to hold books, the administration built itself a huge building to house their fancy offices. This is a typical example of how much our Davis school system cares about its students.
I have not seen any change thus far in how our schools do business. How much did they spend on a consultant, to turn around and ignore his advice. It is disgustingly just more of the same.
Let me explain why a lot of us cannot agree with your assessment DPD:
1) Valley Oak was not closed because of budget cuts as you propound. Valley Oak was closed before the state budget cuts hit. Ostensibly it was closed due to “declining enrollment”. But guess what? Enrollment at the elementary school level is up 75 students. The School District/Board got it wrong – yet again.
2) A climate coordinator would not have helped the bullying problem. My son went through hell all of his years in Davis schools. It takes a united front, a committed administration. When you have leaders of gangs living with the vice principal, no climate coordinator is going to help. When you have teachers that look the other way at bullying, who do not control their classrooms, that tell bullied students if they complain one more time they are going to get expelled, no climate coordinator is going to be able to control a pervasive atmosphere of drug deals in the open, assaults in the classroom, administrators working on advanced degrees who are not minding the store, etc, etc, etc. Do you really think a climate coordinator was going to get at the root problem of the bullying, which is a faculty and administration that are asleep at the switch? Dream on.
3) If the Achievement Gap Task Force identified the problems of minority and low income children back in 1990, and those same problems still exist despite all the money we have funneled into parcel taxes to solve the problem, then the faculty and administration do not have the will to do a damn thing about this issue. Another parcel tax will not be used to fix the problem. Instead, it will be used to keep music, art, after school athletics, Mandarin Chinese 4, Da Vinci, all the boutique programs alive – while the best EL program in Davis at Valley Oak was axed with very little fanfare. More money will not assist those truly in need – it will continue to be funneled to the kids that need it the least.
4) Sure the School Bd/District assisted you. They wanted to be able to wash their hands of past malfeasance, which they did vociferously. Yet it is members of this School Board who closed Valley Oak by refusing to allow it to continue as a charter school, even against the advice of their own Supt. It is this School Board that argued closing Valley Oak would be good for minority students, bc it would spread them out instead of concentrating them (Susan Lovenburg). It is this School Board that tried to close Emerson. It is this School Board that claimed the lower pass rate of the last parcel tax was because the voters just didn’t understand and needed more “educating” – as if the public were dumb bunnies incapable of understanding basic issues.
IMHO, it is the School Board/District that needs the education. They have squandered money with abandon; turned to taxpayers to bail them out; refuse to define “core curricula” because there is not a single program they have developed that is considered anything but essential; have ducked true accountability; have put nothing in place to guarantee that too many schools will not be built ever again, etc., etc. etc. ad nauseum.
DPD, the fallacy of your arguments is that you assume money is the solution to problems. Often it is not. I would gladly vote for Measure W if I thought it would really address the underlying problems in our schools. But I have absolutely no faith it will. There is a cancerous growth in our schools, that takes ever and ever increasing amounts of money to fund boutique curricula, while virtually leaving the real problems unaddressed.
The School Board/District has convinced you otherwise. However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times. Parents are treated w absolute arrogance, as are students. There is an underlying corrossive atmosphere that is counterproductive to learning.
While students at the high school had to walk between classes in the rain, slogging through huge puddles bc the roof drainage was not addressed, while students had to share tiny lockers insufficient to hold books, the administration built itself a huge building to house their fancy offices. This is a typical example of how much our Davis school system cares about its students.
I have not seen any change thus far in how our schools do business. How much did they spend on a consultant, to turn around and ignore his advice. It is disgustingly just more of the same.
Correction: I have not seen any change thus far in how our schools do business. How much did they spend on a consultant in regard to the parcel tax and how much to ask for, to turn around and ignore his advice. It is disgustingly just more of the same.
Correction: I have not seen any change thus far in how our schools do business. How much did they spend on a consultant in regard to the parcel tax and how much to ask for, to turn around and ignore his advice. It is disgustingly just more of the same.
Correction: I have not seen any change thus far in how our schools do business. How much did they spend on a consultant in regard to the parcel tax and how much to ask for, to turn around and ignore his advice. It is disgustingly just more of the same.
Correction: I have not seen any change thus far in how our schools do business. How much did they spend on a consultant in regard to the parcel tax and how much to ask for, to turn around and ignore his advice. It is disgustingly just more of the same.
The consultant didn’t give the board “advice,” he told them the percent who would vote for the tax based on a few different scenarios used in his polling and focus groups. They looked at his findings based on polling of $80 or $140, and at what they felt the district needed, and put the number at $120.
The consultant didn’t give the board “advice,” he told them the percent who would vote for the tax based on a few different scenarios used in his polling and focus groups. They looked at his findings based on polling of $80 or $140, and at what they felt the district needed, and put the number at $120.
The consultant didn’t give the board “advice,” he told them the percent who would vote for the tax based on a few different scenarios used in his polling and focus groups. They looked at his findings based on polling of $80 or $140, and at what they felt the district needed, and put the number at $120.
The consultant didn’t give the board “advice,” he told them the percent who would vote for the tax based on a few different scenarios used in his polling and focus groups. They looked at his findings based on polling of $80 or $140, and at what they felt the district needed, and put the number at $120.
“The consultant didn’t give the board “advice,” he told them the percent who would vote for the tax based on a few different scenarios used in his polling and focus groups. They looked at his findings based on polling of $80 or $140, and at what they felt the district needed, and put the number at $120.”
Now this sort of parsing is what makes my blood boil and my frustrations high. The School Board/District expended money they can’t afford to squander on a consultant. That very consultant showed results indicating a $140 parcel tax would not get the required number of votes, but an $80 parcel tax might squeak by.
So in my book that is an indication the School Board/District is ignoring the “advice” – or excuse me, “findings” if you want to split hairs – of its own consultant.
You can nitpick all you want, but the result is still the same – as usual the School District/Board ignores the evidence in front of it, and instead chooses to do whatever it wants. Well this time, they do so at their peril. Many citizens are fed up at that sort of egocentric attitude that does not bode well for the individual student, especially those students that don’t fit the common mold, like ethnic minorities, learning disabled, geeks, nerds, children of smaller stature.
“The consultant didn’t give the board “advice,” he told them the percent who would vote for the tax based on a few different scenarios used in his polling and focus groups. They looked at his findings based on polling of $80 or $140, and at what they felt the district needed, and put the number at $120.”
Now this sort of parsing is what makes my blood boil and my frustrations high. The School Board/District expended money they can’t afford to squander on a consultant. That very consultant showed results indicating a $140 parcel tax would not get the required number of votes, but an $80 parcel tax might squeak by.
So in my book that is an indication the School Board/District is ignoring the “advice” – or excuse me, “findings” if you want to split hairs – of its own consultant.
You can nitpick all you want, but the result is still the same – as usual the School District/Board ignores the evidence in front of it, and instead chooses to do whatever it wants. Well this time, they do so at their peril. Many citizens are fed up at that sort of egocentric attitude that does not bode well for the individual student, especially those students that don’t fit the common mold, like ethnic minorities, learning disabled, geeks, nerds, children of smaller stature.
“The consultant didn’t give the board “advice,” he told them the percent who would vote for the tax based on a few different scenarios used in his polling and focus groups. They looked at his findings based on polling of $80 or $140, and at what they felt the district needed, and put the number at $120.”
Now this sort of parsing is what makes my blood boil and my frustrations high. The School Board/District expended money they can’t afford to squander on a consultant. That very consultant showed results indicating a $140 parcel tax would not get the required number of votes, but an $80 parcel tax might squeak by.
So in my book that is an indication the School Board/District is ignoring the “advice” – or excuse me, “findings” if you want to split hairs – of its own consultant.
You can nitpick all you want, but the result is still the same – as usual the School District/Board ignores the evidence in front of it, and instead chooses to do whatever it wants. Well this time, they do so at their peril. Many citizens are fed up at that sort of egocentric attitude that does not bode well for the individual student, especially those students that don’t fit the common mold, like ethnic minorities, learning disabled, geeks, nerds, children of smaller stature.
“The consultant didn’t give the board “advice,” he told them the percent who would vote for the tax based on a few different scenarios used in his polling and focus groups. They looked at his findings based on polling of $80 or $140, and at what they felt the district needed, and put the number at $120.”
Now this sort of parsing is what makes my blood boil and my frustrations high. The School Board/District expended money they can’t afford to squander on a consultant. That very consultant showed results indicating a $140 parcel tax would not get the required number of votes, but an $80 parcel tax might squeak by.
So in my book that is an indication the School Board/District is ignoring the “advice” – or excuse me, “findings” if you want to split hairs – of its own consultant.
You can nitpick all you want, but the result is still the same – as usual the School District/Board ignores the evidence in front of it, and instead chooses to do whatever it wants. Well this time, they do so at their peril. Many citizens are fed up at that sort of egocentric attitude that does not bode well for the individual student, especially those students that don’t fit the common mold, like ethnic minorities, learning disabled, geeks, nerds, children of smaller stature.
“However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times.”
I am a parent with kids in Davis schools, and I basically agree with DPD’s assessment, in case having kids in Davis schools is necessary to have credible arguments.
It’s not really nitpicking.
Imagine this scenario: the district puts an $80 parcel tax on the ballot. BTW, $80 was closer to passing than $140, but it was not actually passing according to their polling. The public passed the $80 parcel tax. However, it turns out $80 would not have been all the money they needed. So then the district has to cut money, which means laying off teachers. Then people like you would have been up in arms saying we just passed this parcel tax and they are still laying off teachers. How could they do that? They know full well this is going to be difficult to pass, but they still had to try to get the money they believed they needed, or they would have been irresponsible.
“However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times.”
I am a parent with kids in Davis schools, and I basically agree with DPD’s assessment, in case having kids in Davis schools is necessary to have credible arguments.
It’s not really nitpicking.
Imagine this scenario: the district puts an $80 parcel tax on the ballot. BTW, $80 was closer to passing than $140, but it was not actually passing according to their polling. The public passed the $80 parcel tax. However, it turns out $80 would not have been all the money they needed. So then the district has to cut money, which means laying off teachers. Then people like you would have been up in arms saying we just passed this parcel tax and they are still laying off teachers. How could they do that? They know full well this is going to be difficult to pass, but they still had to try to get the money they believed they needed, or they would have been irresponsible.
“However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times.”
I am a parent with kids in Davis schools, and I basically agree with DPD’s assessment, in case having kids in Davis schools is necessary to have credible arguments.
It’s not really nitpicking.
Imagine this scenario: the district puts an $80 parcel tax on the ballot. BTW, $80 was closer to passing than $140, but it was not actually passing according to their polling. The public passed the $80 parcel tax. However, it turns out $80 would not have been all the money they needed. So then the district has to cut money, which means laying off teachers. Then people like you would have been up in arms saying we just passed this parcel tax and they are still laying off teachers. How could they do that? They know full well this is going to be difficult to pass, but they still had to try to get the money they believed they needed, or they would have been irresponsible.
“However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times.”
I am a parent with kids in Davis schools, and I basically agree with DPD’s assessment, in case having kids in Davis schools is necessary to have credible arguments.
It’s not really nitpicking.
Imagine this scenario: the district puts an $80 parcel tax on the ballot. BTW, $80 was closer to passing than $140, but it was not actually passing according to their polling. The public passed the $80 parcel tax. However, it turns out $80 would not have been all the money they needed. So then the district has to cut money, which means laying off teachers. Then people like you would have been up in arms saying we just passed this parcel tax and they are still laying off teachers. How could they do that? They know full well this is going to be difficult to pass, but they still had to try to get the money they believed they needed, or they would have been irresponsible.
District has a new website up, only an hour or so ago at http://www.djusd.net//.
District has a new website up, only an hour or so ago at http://www.djusd.net//.
District has a new website up, only an hour or so ago at http://www.djusd.net//.
District has a new website up, only an hour or so ago at http://www.djusd.net//.
“However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times.”
Would you propose that other districts, schools nearby would have done a superior job to DJUSD with your kids?
“However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times.”
Would you propose that other districts, schools nearby would have done a superior job to DJUSD with your kids?
“However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times.”
Would you propose that other districts, schools nearby would have done a superior job to DJUSD with your kids?
“However, you have not had any children go through the public school system in Davis. I have had three, and all had some really tough times.”
Would you propose that other districts, schools nearby would have done a superior job to DJUSD with your kids?
“My biggest fear in all of this is that people may use the wrong reasons to not support education in Davis. It is not the children’s fault that the previous administration made a series of very serious errors. It is not their fault that you may feel overburdened in your taxes, overwhelmed by a poor economy, a bad housing market, high fuel prices, etc. I understand all of that. But at the end of the day once again, we only get one shot at educating the youth in this community, they get only one shot at childhood, and for some kids, they need all the help they can get.”
It’s not the taxpayers fault either.
Excuse me, but the school board is not exactly going out of its way to assure us this will not happen again.
David, I am disappointed. Come on. You of all people should know better than accept the stories the school board feeds us. This school board stinks to high heaven. We all know it.
Secondly, James Hammond participated in the destruction of Valley Oak. He had the supporters of Valley Oak take additional time to reach a compromise knowing full well it would go beyond the deadline and result in the schools’ closure.
James Hammond thinks he is soooo slick. Sorry Mr. Highest paid Superintendent in Yolo county, but I see right through you.
If the kids’ parents are priced out of their houses, they’ll suffer.
“My biggest fear in all of this is that people may use the wrong reasons to not support education in Davis. It is not the children’s fault that the previous administration made a series of very serious errors. It is not their fault that you may feel overburdened in your taxes, overwhelmed by a poor economy, a bad housing market, high fuel prices, etc. I understand all of that. But at the end of the day once again, we only get one shot at educating the youth in this community, they get only one shot at childhood, and for some kids, they need all the help they can get.”
It’s not the taxpayers fault either.
Excuse me, but the school board is not exactly going out of its way to assure us this will not happen again.
David, I am disappointed. Come on. You of all people should know better than accept the stories the school board feeds us. This school board stinks to high heaven. We all know it.
Secondly, James Hammond participated in the destruction of Valley Oak. He had the supporters of Valley Oak take additional time to reach a compromise knowing full well it would go beyond the deadline and result in the schools’ closure.
James Hammond thinks he is soooo slick. Sorry Mr. Highest paid Superintendent in Yolo county, but I see right through you.
If the kids’ parents are priced out of their houses, they’ll suffer.
“My biggest fear in all of this is that people may use the wrong reasons to not support education in Davis. It is not the children’s fault that the previous administration made a series of very serious errors. It is not their fault that you may feel overburdened in your taxes, overwhelmed by a poor economy, a bad housing market, high fuel prices, etc. I understand all of that. But at the end of the day once again, we only get one shot at educating the youth in this community, they get only one shot at childhood, and for some kids, they need all the help they can get.”
It’s not the taxpayers fault either.
Excuse me, but the school board is not exactly going out of its way to assure us this will not happen again.
David, I am disappointed. Come on. You of all people should know better than accept the stories the school board feeds us. This school board stinks to high heaven. We all know it.
Secondly, James Hammond participated in the destruction of Valley Oak. He had the supporters of Valley Oak take additional time to reach a compromise knowing full well it would go beyond the deadline and result in the schools’ closure.
James Hammond thinks he is soooo slick. Sorry Mr. Highest paid Superintendent in Yolo county, but I see right through you.
If the kids’ parents are priced out of their houses, they’ll suffer.
“My biggest fear in all of this is that people may use the wrong reasons to not support education in Davis. It is not the children’s fault that the previous administration made a series of very serious errors. It is not their fault that you may feel overburdened in your taxes, overwhelmed by a poor economy, a bad housing market, high fuel prices, etc. I understand all of that. But at the end of the day once again, we only get one shot at educating the youth in this community, they get only one shot at childhood, and for some kids, they need all the help they can get.”
It’s not the taxpayers fault either.
Excuse me, but the school board is not exactly going out of its way to assure us this will not happen again.
David, I am disappointed. Come on. You of all people should know better than accept the stories the school board feeds us. This school board stinks to high heaven. We all know it.
Secondly, James Hammond participated in the destruction of Valley Oak. He had the supporters of Valley Oak take additional time to reach a compromise knowing full well it would go beyond the deadline and result in the schools’ closure.
James Hammond thinks he is soooo slick. Sorry Mr. Highest paid Superintendent in Yolo county, but I see right through you.
If the kids’ parents are priced out of their houses, they’ll suffer.
Don Shor – You are incorrect. We ARE LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY $200 or MORE for water rate hikes.
This is a VERY, VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE PROPOSAL.
I don’t know where DPD gets his info, but speaking with friends who work in this field they say that Davisites are in for a rude awakening if this goes through.
Don Shor – You are incorrect. We ARE LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY $200 or MORE for water rate hikes.
This is a VERY, VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE PROPOSAL.
I don’t know where DPD gets his info, but speaking with friends who work in this field they say that Davisites are in for a rude awakening if this goes through.
Don Shor – You are incorrect. We ARE LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY $200 or MORE for water rate hikes.
This is a VERY, VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE PROPOSAL.
I don’t know where DPD gets his info, but speaking with friends who work in this field they say that Davisites are in for a rude awakening if this goes through.
Don Shor – You are incorrect. We ARE LOOKING AT APPROXIMATELY $200 or MORE for water rate hikes.
This is a VERY, VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE PROPOSAL.
I don’t know where DPD gets his info, but speaking with friends who work in this field they say that Davisites are in for a rude awakening if this goes through.
“the best EL program in Davis at Valley Oak was axed with very little fanfare.”
The UC Davis study on English Language Learner instruction in Davis schools done a couple years ago did not find significant differences among the schools in EL teaching techniques, instruction or results for the students.
Responding to this post:
“It’s not the taxpayers fault either.”
Taxpayers get to may a decision as to whether or not to support education with another $120 per year ($10 per month). The children don’t. Sorry, my sympathies here still lie with the kids.
“Excuse me, but the school board is not exactly going out of its way to assure us this will not happen again.”
I think they have by taking measures to prevent future abuses such as the conflict of interest codes and better fiscal accounting policies.
“David, I am disappointed. Come on. You of all people should know better than accept the stories the school board feeds us.”
Then maybe you ought to trust me that I have looked into everything and questioned hard where I have felt those questions deserved. I looked very hard at the district for four or five months during my investigation, I believe that polices have been implemented to improve things.
“Secondly, James Hammond participated in the destruction of Valley Oak. He had the supporters of Valley Oak take additional time to reach a compromise knowing full well it would go beyond the deadline and result in the schools’ closure.”
If he hadn’t done that, there was no chance for the charter to have succeeded at the district level. The charter sponsors agreed to do this as well, I think Hammond’s effort was completely in good faith. I doubt you’ll hear any of the sponsors complain about Dr. Hammond.
I think you are firing too broadly at good people in this comment. Stick to the bad guys, don’t be hitting the good guys.
“the best EL program in Davis at Valley Oak was axed with very little fanfare.”
The UC Davis study on English Language Learner instruction in Davis schools done a couple years ago did not find significant differences among the schools in EL teaching techniques, instruction or results for the students.
Responding to this post:
“It’s not the taxpayers fault either.”
Taxpayers get to may a decision as to whether or not to support education with another $120 per year ($10 per month). The children don’t. Sorry, my sympathies here still lie with the kids.
“Excuse me, but the school board is not exactly going out of its way to assure us this will not happen again.”
I think they have by taking measures to prevent future abuses such as the conflict of interest codes and better fiscal accounting policies.
“David, I am disappointed. Come on. You of all people should know better than accept the stories the school board feeds us.”
Then maybe you ought to trust me that I have looked into everything and questioned hard where I have felt those questions deserved. I looked very hard at the district for four or five months during my investigation, I believe that polices have been implemented to improve things.
“Secondly, James Hammond participated in the destruction of Valley Oak. He had the supporters of Valley Oak take additional time to reach a compromise knowing full well it would go beyond the deadline and result in the schools’ closure.”
If he hadn’t done that, there was no chance for the charter to have succeeded at the district level. The charter sponsors agreed to do this as well, I think Hammond’s effort was completely in good faith. I doubt you’ll hear any of the sponsors complain about Dr. Hammond.
I think you are firing too broadly at good people in this comment. Stick to the bad guys, don’t be hitting the good guys.
“the best EL program in Davis at Valley Oak was axed with very little fanfare.”
The UC Davis study on English Language Learner instruction in Davis schools done a couple years ago did not find significant differences among the schools in EL teaching techniques, instruction or results for the students.
Responding to this post:
“It’s not the taxpayers fault either.”
Taxpayers get to may a decision as to whether or not to support education with another $120 per year ($10 per month). The children don’t. Sorry, my sympathies here still lie with the kids.
“Excuse me, but the school board is not exactly going out of its way to assure us this will not happen again.”
I think they have by taking measures to prevent future abuses such as the conflict of interest codes and better fiscal accounting policies.
“David, I am disappointed. Come on. You of all people should know better than accept the stories the school board feeds us.”
Then maybe you ought to trust me that I have looked into everything and questioned hard where I have felt those questions deserved. I looked very hard at the district for four or five months during my investigation, I believe that polices have been implemented to improve things.
“Secondly, James Hammond participated in the destruction of Valley Oak. He had the supporters of Valley Oak take additional time to reach a compromise knowing full well it would go beyond the deadline and result in the schools’ closure.”
If he hadn’t done that, there was no chance for the charter to have succeeded at the district level. The charter sponsors agreed to do this as well, I think Hammond’s effort was completely in good faith. I doubt you’ll hear any of the sponsors complain about Dr. Hammond.
I think you are firing too broadly at good people in this comment. Stick to the bad guys, don’t be hitting the good guys.
“the best EL program in Davis at Valley Oak was axed with very little fanfare.”
The UC Davis study on English Language Learner instruction in Davis schools done a couple years ago did not find significant differences among the schools in EL teaching techniques, instruction or results for the students.
Responding to this post:
“It’s not the taxpayers fault either.”
Taxpayers get to may a decision as to whether or not to support education with another $120 per year ($10 per month). The children don’t. Sorry, my sympathies here still lie with the kids.
“Excuse me, but the school board is not exactly going out of its way to assure us this will not happen again.”
I think they have by taking measures to prevent future abuses such as the conflict of interest codes and better fiscal accounting policies.
“David, I am disappointed. Come on. You of all people should know better than accept the stories the school board feeds us.”
Then maybe you ought to trust me that I have looked into everything and questioned hard where I have felt those questions deserved. I looked very hard at the district for four or five months during my investigation, I believe that polices have been implemented to improve things.
“Secondly, James Hammond participated in the destruction of Valley Oak. He had the supporters of Valley Oak take additional time to reach a compromise knowing full well it would go beyond the deadline and result in the schools’ closure.”
If he hadn’t done that, there was no chance for the charter to have succeeded at the district level. The charter sponsors agreed to do this as well, I think Hammond’s effort was completely in good faith. I doubt you’ll hear any of the sponsors complain about Dr. Hammond.
I think you are firing too broadly at good people in this comment. Stick to the bad guys, don’t be hitting the good guys.
I am supporting Measure W.
I can’t and will not support the increase in water hikes, but we must support our children and the children of the Davis community.
The adults can squabble and discuss the heck out of issues all they want, but in the end it’s the children who will suffer if W does not pass.
Please vote for Measure W.
I am supporting Measure W.
I can’t and will not support the increase in water hikes, but we must support our children and the children of the Davis community.
The adults can squabble and discuss the heck out of issues all they want, but in the end it’s the children who will suffer if W does not pass.
Please vote for Measure W.
I am supporting Measure W.
I can’t and will not support the increase in water hikes, but we must support our children and the children of the Davis community.
The adults can squabble and discuss the heck out of issues all they want, but in the end it’s the children who will suffer if W does not pass.
Please vote for Measure W.
I am supporting Measure W.
I can’t and will not support the increase in water hikes, but we must support our children and the children of the Davis community.
The adults can squabble and discuss the heck out of issues all they want, but in the end it’s the children who will suffer if W does not pass.
Please vote for Measure W.
Hammond deserves the chance to show that he can do things better then in the past. He has already done what the previous administation could not do, he hired an African American Vice-Principal at the high school. He also hired another VP, Mark Dietrich, who, I had the pleasure of working with at Armijo High. I think these guys will do as much or more for climate change than any coordinator you could ever find. What kid wants to answer to an African American disciplinarian and role model about racial slurs?
While I agree that closing Valley Oak was a serious mistake I think it is wrong to punish the kids for the failures of the adults. If you have a problem with the board vote them out but don’t cut the stuff that makes the schools great by voting against bailing them out before giving the new guy the time to right the ship.
Hammond deserves the chance to show that he can do things better then in the past. He has already done what the previous administation could not do, he hired an African American Vice-Principal at the high school. He also hired another VP, Mark Dietrich, who, I had the pleasure of working with at Armijo High. I think these guys will do as much or more for climate change than any coordinator you could ever find. What kid wants to answer to an African American disciplinarian and role model about racial slurs?
While I agree that closing Valley Oak was a serious mistake I think it is wrong to punish the kids for the failures of the adults. If you have a problem with the board vote them out but don’t cut the stuff that makes the schools great by voting against bailing them out before giving the new guy the time to right the ship.
Hammond deserves the chance to show that he can do things better then in the past. He has already done what the previous administation could not do, he hired an African American Vice-Principal at the high school. He also hired another VP, Mark Dietrich, who, I had the pleasure of working with at Armijo High. I think these guys will do as much or more for climate change than any coordinator you could ever find. What kid wants to answer to an African American disciplinarian and role model about racial slurs?
While I agree that closing Valley Oak was a serious mistake I think it is wrong to punish the kids for the failures of the adults. If you have a problem with the board vote them out but don’t cut the stuff that makes the schools great by voting against bailing them out before giving the new guy the time to right the ship.
Hammond deserves the chance to show that he can do things better then in the past. He has already done what the previous administation could not do, he hired an African American Vice-Principal at the high school. He also hired another VP, Mark Dietrich, who, I had the pleasure of working with at Armijo High. I think these guys will do as much or more for climate change than any coordinator you could ever find. What kid wants to answer to an African American disciplinarian and role model about racial slurs?
While I agree that closing Valley Oak was a serious mistake I think it is wrong to punish the kids for the failures of the adults. If you have a problem with the board vote them out but don’t cut the stuff that makes the schools great by voting against bailing them out before giving the new guy the time to right the ship.
When voting, don’t forget to vote for W and against Prop 8. DPD’s buddy Matt Rexroad is in full support of abolishing gay rights…
From Rexroad’s Flashreport blog:
——————
“Supervisor Matt Rexroad – Statewide (bio) (email)(print) 8-24-2008 1:57 pm
Another local elected official in Woodland just sent me an e-mail asking why I was not listed as someone endorsing Proposition 8 (Marriage Protection).
I did not have a good answer for that — except that I had not been asked for my official support of the measure until now.
Many local elected officials read this blog. You can add your name to the growing list of people supporting marriage as being defined as between one man and one woman by clicking here.
Just click on “Endorse Us Today” and add your information. I just did.
If you look at the endorsement list it already includes FlashReport bloggers Senator George Runner, Senator Jim Battin, Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa, West Covina School Board Member Mike Spence, and former Assemblyman Ray Haynes”
When voting, don’t forget to vote for W and against Prop 8. DPD’s buddy Matt Rexroad is in full support of abolishing gay rights…
From Rexroad’s Flashreport blog:
——————
“Supervisor Matt Rexroad – Statewide (bio) (email)(print) 8-24-2008 1:57 pm
Another local elected official in Woodland just sent me an e-mail asking why I was not listed as someone endorsing Proposition 8 (Marriage Protection).
I did not have a good answer for that — except that I had not been asked for my official support of the measure until now.
Many local elected officials read this blog. You can add your name to the growing list of people supporting marriage as being defined as between one man and one woman by clicking here.
Just click on “Endorse Us Today” and add your information. I just did.
If you look at the endorsement list it already includes FlashReport bloggers Senator George Runner, Senator Jim Battin, Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa, West Covina School Board Member Mike Spence, and former Assemblyman Ray Haynes”
When voting, don’t forget to vote for W and against Prop 8. DPD’s buddy Matt Rexroad is in full support of abolishing gay rights…
From Rexroad’s Flashreport blog:
——————
“Supervisor Matt Rexroad – Statewide (bio) (email)(print) 8-24-2008 1:57 pm
Another local elected official in Woodland just sent me an e-mail asking why I was not listed as someone endorsing Proposition 8 (Marriage Protection).
I did not have a good answer for that — except that I had not been asked for my official support of the measure until now.
Many local elected officials read this blog. You can add your name to the growing list of people supporting marriage as being defined as between one man and one woman by clicking here.
Just click on “Endorse Us Today” and add your information. I just did.
If you look at the endorsement list it already includes FlashReport bloggers Senator George Runner, Senator Jim Battin, Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa, West Covina School Board Member Mike Spence, and former Assemblyman Ray Haynes”
When voting, don’t forget to vote for W and against Prop 8. DPD’s buddy Matt Rexroad is in full support of abolishing gay rights…
From Rexroad’s Flashreport blog:
——————
“Supervisor Matt Rexroad – Statewide (bio) (email)(print) 8-24-2008 1:57 pm
Another local elected official in Woodland just sent me an e-mail asking why I was not listed as someone endorsing Proposition 8 (Marriage Protection).
I did not have a good answer for that — except that I had not been asked for my official support of the measure until now.
Many local elected officials read this blog. You can add your name to the growing list of people supporting marriage as being defined as between one man and one woman by clicking here.
Just click on “Endorse Us Today” and add your information. I just did.
If you look at the endorsement list it already includes FlashReport bloggers Senator George Runner, Senator Jim Battin, Assemblyman Doug LaMalfa, West Covina School Board Member Mike Spence, and former Assemblyman Ray Haynes”
I agree that throwing money at the schools (or city) will not necessarily help. They need to take a good look at how they do business and consider a new paradigm…..in specific cases. I for one do not think the DJUSD or Board has done a good job differentiating W from the Q funds. It may be buried but I have not seen it in bold…a common question from taxpayers. I realize there hasn’t been a need yet for the oversite function for Q funds, but I for one would be more inclined to be positive about W if I heard more about those plans for Q and W….many would which indicates the degree of ?trust many of us have for the schools’ administration. The new Board to me does not take important issues seriously enough….Richard Harris for one seems to only like to hear his own lame jokes….
and finally, I have not been clear or convinced on the Board’s defintiion of core issues which both Q and W were to address. Several Board members stated core was music, etc. To me core is the ‘old 3 R’s’.
I have a ways to go before I am swayed to support W.
I agree that throwing money at the schools (or city) will not necessarily help. They need to take a good look at how they do business and consider a new paradigm…..in specific cases. I for one do not think the DJUSD or Board has done a good job differentiating W from the Q funds. It may be buried but I have not seen it in bold…a common question from taxpayers. I realize there hasn’t been a need yet for the oversite function for Q funds, but I for one would be more inclined to be positive about W if I heard more about those plans for Q and W….many would which indicates the degree of ?trust many of us have for the schools’ administration. The new Board to me does not take important issues seriously enough….Richard Harris for one seems to only like to hear his own lame jokes….
and finally, I have not been clear or convinced on the Board’s defintiion of core issues which both Q and W were to address. Several Board members stated core was music, etc. To me core is the ‘old 3 R’s’.
I have a ways to go before I am swayed to support W.
I agree that throwing money at the schools (or city) will not necessarily help. They need to take a good look at how they do business and consider a new paradigm…..in specific cases. I for one do not think the DJUSD or Board has done a good job differentiating W from the Q funds. It may be buried but I have not seen it in bold…a common question from taxpayers. I realize there hasn’t been a need yet for the oversite function for Q funds, but I for one would be more inclined to be positive about W if I heard more about those plans for Q and W….many would which indicates the degree of ?trust many of us have for the schools’ administration. The new Board to me does not take important issues seriously enough….Richard Harris for one seems to only like to hear his own lame jokes….
and finally, I have not been clear or convinced on the Board’s defintiion of core issues which both Q and W were to address. Several Board members stated core was music, etc. To me core is the ‘old 3 R’s’.
I have a ways to go before I am swayed to support W.
I agree that throwing money at the schools (or city) will not necessarily help. They need to take a good look at how they do business and consider a new paradigm…..in specific cases. I for one do not think the DJUSD or Board has done a good job differentiating W from the Q funds. It may be buried but I have not seen it in bold…a common question from taxpayers. I realize there hasn’t been a need yet for the oversite function for Q funds, but I for one would be more inclined to be positive about W if I heard more about those plans for Q and W….many would which indicates the degree of ?trust many of us have for the schools’ administration. The new Board to me does not take important issues seriously enough….Richard Harris for one seems to only like to hear his own lame jokes….
and finally, I have not been clear or convinced on the Board’s defintiion of core issues which both Q and W were to address. Several Board members stated core was music, etc. To me core is the ‘old 3 R’s’.
I have a ways to go before I am swayed to support W.
“Doug Paul Davis said…
It’s not really nitpicking.”
DPD: WRONG. If they were going to go with the higher number, whatever the consultant’s “findings” were, then why pay out the good money for the polling??
“Doug Paul Davis said…
It’s not really nitpicking.”
DPD: WRONG. If they were going to go with the higher number, whatever the consultant’s “findings” were, then why pay out the good money for the polling??
“Doug Paul Davis said…
It’s not really nitpicking.”
DPD: WRONG. If they were going to go with the higher number, whatever the consultant’s “findings” were, then why pay out the good money for the polling??
“Doug Paul Davis said…
It’s not really nitpicking.”
DPD: WRONG. If they were going to go with the higher number, whatever the consultant’s “findings” were, then why pay out the good money for the polling??
Because you always poll. You don’t just poll for the results either. You poll to find out what the voters are thinking, if they are on the bubble what are their concerns, how do you address them. If they are voting no, are they going to be lost causes or can you sway them. You need this information in order to run an effective campaign and to also make the decisions about how and when to run. There really wasn’t a huge difference between the $80 and $120, especially when you factor in the sample size and high margin of error. Those numbers are a guide, but you get a whole lot more information than just numbers. From those numbers they could see that it is possible for them to win but it would be difficult at either level. At the end of the day, they chose to ask for what they needed, anything else I think would have been dangerous.
Because you always poll. You don’t just poll for the results either. You poll to find out what the voters are thinking, if they are on the bubble what are their concerns, how do you address them. If they are voting no, are they going to be lost causes or can you sway them. You need this information in order to run an effective campaign and to also make the decisions about how and when to run. There really wasn’t a huge difference between the $80 and $120, especially when you factor in the sample size and high margin of error. Those numbers are a guide, but you get a whole lot more information than just numbers. From those numbers they could see that it is possible for them to win but it would be difficult at either level. At the end of the day, they chose to ask for what they needed, anything else I think would have been dangerous.
Because you always poll. You don’t just poll for the results either. You poll to find out what the voters are thinking, if they are on the bubble what are their concerns, how do you address them. If they are voting no, are they going to be lost causes or can you sway them. You need this information in order to run an effective campaign and to also make the decisions about how and when to run. There really wasn’t a huge difference between the $80 and $120, especially when you factor in the sample size and high margin of error. Those numbers are a guide, but you get a whole lot more information than just numbers. From those numbers they could see that it is possible for them to win but it would be difficult at either level. At the end of the day, they chose to ask for what they needed, anything else I think would have been dangerous.
Because you always poll. You don’t just poll for the results either. You poll to find out what the voters are thinking, if they are on the bubble what are their concerns, how do you address them. If they are voting no, are they going to be lost causes or can you sway them. You need this information in order to run an effective campaign and to also make the decisions about how and when to run. There really wasn’t a huge difference between the $80 and $120, especially when you factor in the sample size and high margin of error. Those numbers are a guide, but you get a whole lot more information than just numbers. From those numbers they could see that it is possible for them to win but it would be difficult at either level. At the end of the day, they chose to ask for what they needed, anything else I think would have been dangerous.
“I for one do not think the DJUSD or Board has done a good job differentiating W from the Q funds. “
I both disagree and agree with you here. I think they tried to make the case in the ballot argument, I’m going to try to get a chart that shows the difference.
“I for one do not think the DJUSD or Board has done a good job differentiating W from the Q funds. “
I both disagree and agree with you here. I think they tried to make the case in the ballot argument, I’m going to try to get a chart that shows the difference.
“I for one do not think the DJUSD or Board has done a good job differentiating W from the Q funds. “
I both disagree and agree with you here. I think they tried to make the case in the ballot argument, I’m going to try to get a chart that shows the difference.
“I for one do not think the DJUSD or Board has done a good job differentiating W from the Q funds. “
I both disagree and agree with you here. I think they tried to make the case in the ballot argument, I’m going to try to get a chart that shows the difference.
I am anon 1:57 and DPD…..that you agree the Board has not differentiated enough (maybe the ballot initiative, but who will read that until later?) between W and Q. To me it is a ‘clueless’ness’ or perhaps arrogance of the Board NOT to think this would be a big deal? Don’t forget many voters ALSO ponyed up big time for the donations for the Schools Foundation in between Q and now W. That is often not stated either…..
I am anon 1:57 and DPD…..that you agree the Board has not differentiated enough (maybe the ballot initiative, but who will read that until later?) between W and Q. To me it is a ‘clueless’ness’ or perhaps arrogance of the Board NOT to think this would be a big deal? Don’t forget many voters ALSO ponyed up big time for the donations for the Schools Foundation in between Q and now W. That is often not stated either…..
I am anon 1:57 and DPD…..that you agree the Board has not differentiated enough (maybe the ballot initiative, but who will read that until later?) between W and Q. To me it is a ‘clueless’ness’ or perhaps arrogance of the Board NOT to think this would be a big deal? Don’t forget many voters ALSO ponyed up big time for the donations for the Schools Foundation in between Q and now W. That is often not stated either…..
I am anon 1:57 and DPD…..that you agree the Board has not differentiated enough (maybe the ballot initiative, but who will read that until later?) between W and Q. To me it is a ‘clueless’ness’ or perhaps arrogance of the Board NOT to think this would be a big deal? Don’t forget many voters ALSO ponyed up big time for the donations for the Schools Foundation in between Q and now W. That is often not stated either…..
What does the schools foundaion say about W?
What does the schools foundaion say about W?
What does the schools foundaion say about W?
What does the schools foundaion say about W?
the Board has not differentiated enough (maybe the ballot initiative, but who will read that until later?) between W and Q.
Loyal Vanguard readers have seen both measures cited before. I’m certain that some programs in each measure may complement each other, but I haven’t seen any clear example of overlap.
Once again, this is Measure Q.
This is Measure W (as reported by DPD).
Enjoy!
the Board has not differentiated enough (maybe the ballot initiative, but who will read that until later?) between W and Q.
Loyal Vanguard readers have seen both measures cited before. I’m certain that some programs in each measure may complement each other, but I haven’t seen any clear example of overlap.
Once again, this is Measure Q.
This is Measure W (as reported by DPD).
Enjoy!
the Board has not differentiated enough (maybe the ballot initiative, but who will read that until later?) between W and Q.
Loyal Vanguard readers have seen both measures cited before. I’m certain that some programs in each measure may complement each other, but I haven’t seen any clear example of overlap.
Once again, this is Measure Q.
This is Measure W (as reported by DPD).
Enjoy!
the Board has not differentiated enough (maybe the ballot initiative, but who will read that until later?) between W and Q.
Loyal Vanguard readers have seen both measures cited before. I’m certain that some programs in each measure may complement each other, but I haven’t seen any clear example of overlap.
Once again, this is Measure Q.
This is Measure W (as reported by DPD).
Enjoy!
Loyal Vanguard readers have seen both measures cited before. I’m certain that some programs in each measure may complement each other, but I haven’t seen any clear example of overlap.
Once again, this is Measure Q.
This is Measure W (as reported by DPD).
Loyal Vanguard readers are NOT your average Davis voters….my point is that thisis a common question or should/will be ….and I do not think it has been addressed if they want this to pass.
Loyal Vanguard readers have seen both measures cited before. I’m certain that some programs in each measure may complement each other, but I haven’t seen any clear example of overlap.
Once again, this is Measure Q.
This is Measure W (as reported by DPD).
Loyal Vanguard readers are NOT your average Davis voters….my point is that thisis a common question or should/will be ….and I do not think it has been addressed if they want this to pass.
Loyal Vanguard readers have seen both measures cited before. I’m certain that some programs in each measure may complement each other, but I haven’t seen any clear example of overlap.
Once again, this is Measure Q.
This is Measure W (as reported by DPD).
Loyal Vanguard readers are NOT your average Davis voters….my point is that thisis a common question or should/will be ….and I do not think it has been addressed if they want this to pass.
Loyal Vanguard readers have seen both measures cited before. I’m certain that some programs in each measure may complement each other, but I haven’t seen any clear example of overlap.
Once again, this is Measure Q.
This is Measure W (as reported by DPD).
Loyal Vanguard readers are NOT your average Davis voters….my point is that thisis a common question or should/will be ….and I do not think it has been addressed if they want this to pass.
I realize that the water rates issue probably does not belong in here, but someone brought it up and argued that the $200 figure has no basis. I don’t know about that. I don’t know where that particular number came from. We pay for water usage based on what we use, so I don’t think you can give a flat rate, but maybe an average rate increase. However, more important than that, when the initial study was done on bringing in Sacramento River water (about 10 years ago), it was clearly stated that water users could expect a tripling or even quadrupling of their then-current water bills. That was then. It may be even more now.
This is indeed, a very, very expensive project. And that estimate dealt with construction, transport and delivery, not how much it is going to cost to clean up the river water of its pesticides, herbicides, pharmaceuticals, hormones, antibiotics, and other contaminants.
We are in for a rude awakening.
I realize that the water rates issue probably does not belong in here, but someone brought it up and argued that the $200 figure has no basis. I don’t know about that. I don’t know where that particular number came from. We pay for water usage based on what we use, so I don’t think you can give a flat rate, but maybe an average rate increase. However, more important than that, when the initial study was done on bringing in Sacramento River water (about 10 years ago), it was clearly stated that water users could expect a tripling or even quadrupling of their then-current water bills. That was then. It may be even more now.
This is indeed, a very, very expensive project. And that estimate dealt with construction, transport and delivery, not how much it is going to cost to clean up the river water of its pesticides, herbicides, pharmaceuticals, hormones, antibiotics, and other contaminants.
We are in for a rude awakening.
I realize that the water rates issue probably does not belong in here, but someone brought it up and argued that the $200 figure has no basis. I don’t know about that. I don’t know where that particular number came from. We pay for water usage based on what we use, so I don’t think you can give a flat rate, but maybe an average rate increase. However, more important than that, when the initial study was done on bringing in Sacramento River water (about 10 years ago), it was clearly stated that water users could expect a tripling or even quadrupling of their then-current water bills. That was then. It may be even more now.
This is indeed, a very, very expensive project. And that estimate dealt with construction, transport and delivery, not how much it is going to cost to clean up the river water of its pesticides, herbicides, pharmaceuticals, hormones, antibiotics, and other contaminants.
We are in for a rude awakening.
I realize that the water rates issue probably does not belong in here, but someone brought it up and argued that the $200 figure has no basis. I don’t know about that. I don’t know where that particular number came from. We pay for water usage based on what we use, so I don’t think you can give a flat rate, but maybe an average rate increase. However, more important than that, when the initial study was done on bringing in Sacramento River water (about 10 years ago), it was clearly stated that water users could expect a tripling or even quadrupling of their then-current water bills. That was then. It may be even more now.
This is indeed, a very, very expensive project. And that estimate dealt with construction, transport and delivery, not how much it is going to cost to clean up the river water of its pesticides, herbicides, pharmaceuticals, hormones, antibiotics, and other contaminants.
We are in for a rude awakening.
“Loyal Vanguard readers are NOT your average Davis voters….my point is that thisis a common question or should/will be ….and I do not think it has been addressed if they want this to pass.”
From what I have seen in looking at the two measures, and for as much scrutiny as this blog gives, collectively, to matters such as this, I don’t think there is any intent to obfuscate.
But since you brought it up, and since I’m sure that Measure W campaign supporters lurk around here, I’m sure it will be considered for future FAQ mention.
“Loyal Vanguard readers are NOT your average Davis voters….my point is that thisis a common question or should/will be ….and I do not think it has been addressed if they want this to pass.”
From what I have seen in looking at the two measures, and for as much scrutiny as this blog gives, collectively, to matters such as this, I don’t think there is any intent to obfuscate.
But since you brought it up, and since I’m sure that Measure W campaign supporters lurk around here, I’m sure it will be considered for future FAQ mention.
“Loyal Vanguard readers are NOT your average Davis voters….my point is that thisis a common question or should/will be ….and I do not think it has been addressed if they want this to pass.”
From what I have seen in looking at the two measures, and for as much scrutiny as this blog gives, collectively, to matters such as this, I don’t think there is any intent to obfuscate.
But since you brought it up, and since I’m sure that Measure W campaign supporters lurk around here, I’m sure it will be considered for future FAQ mention.
“Loyal Vanguard readers are NOT your average Davis voters….my point is that thisis a common question or should/will be ….and I do not think it has been addressed if they want this to pass.”
From what I have seen in looking at the two measures, and for as much scrutiny as this blog gives, collectively, to matters such as this, I don’t think there is any intent to obfuscate.
But since you brought it up, and since I’m sure that Measure W campaign supporters lurk around here, I’m sure it will be considered for future FAQ mention.
Along those lines, I’m going to try put something together that lays it out.
Along those lines, I’m going to try put something together that lays it out.
Along those lines, I’m going to try put something together that lays it out.
Along those lines, I’m going to try put something together that lays it out.
“From those numbers they could see that it is possible for them to win but it would be difficult at either level.”
…now we’re getting closer to the truth. They went for the $120 because they knew that while there was only an outside chance of success at #120, if it failed, they would then really have a ‘sky is falling” narrative to dump on the voters with threatening teacher layoffs etc. The $80 price-tag for the parcel tax addition measure that the Board would offer at the next possible opportunity would then look like a good deal. This kind of voter manipulation is getting pretty tiresome.
“From those numbers they could see that it is possible for them to win but it would be difficult at either level.”
…now we’re getting closer to the truth. They went for the $120 because they knew that while there was only an outside chance of success at #120, if it failed, they would then really have a ‘sky is falling” narrative to dump on the voters with threatening teacher layoffs etc. The $80 price-tag for the parcel tax addition measure that the Board would offer at the next possible opportunity would then look like a good deal. This kind of voter manipulation is getting pretty tiresome.
“From those numbers they could see that it is possible for them to win but it would be difficult at either level.”
…now we’re getting closer to the truth. They went for the $120 because they knew that while there was only an outside chance of success at #120, if it failed, they would then really have a ‘sky is falling” narrative to dump on the voters with threatening teacher layoffs etc. The $80 price-tag for the parcel tax addition measure that the Board would offer at the next possible opportunity would then look like a good deal. This kind of voter manipulation is getting pretty tiresome.
“From those numbers they could see that it is possible for them to win but it would be difficult at either level.”
…now we’re getting closer to the truth. They went for the $120 because they knew that while there was only an outside chance of success at #120, if it failed, they would then really have a ‘sky is falling” narrative to dump on the voters with threatening teacher layoffs etc. The $80 price-tag for the parcel tax addition measure that the Board would offer at the next possible opportunity would then look like a good deal. This kind of voter manipulation is getting pretty tiresome.
Sorry but imo, you are completely wrong and have no evidence to back up your statement.
They picked the $120 because it was determined that was the amount needed to not have to make additional cuts last year.
Answer this question, you keep dodging it: would you or would you not cry foul if they had put an $80 parcel tax on the ballot, it passed, and then they had to lay teachers off because they only got two-thirds of what they needed?
Sorry but imo, you are completely wrong and have no evidence to back up your statement.
They picked the $120 because it was determined that was the amount needed to not have to make additional cuts last year.
Answer this question, you keep dodging it: would you or would you not cry foul if they had put an $80 parcel tax on the ballot, it passed, and then they had to lay teachers off because they only got two-thirds of what they needed?
Sorry but imo, you are completely wrong and have no evidence to back up your statement.
They picked the $120 because it was determined that was the amount needed to not have to make additional cuts last year.
Answer this question, you keep dodging it: would you or would you not cry foul if they had put an $80 parcel tax on the ballot, it passed, and then they had to lay teachers off because they only got two-thirds of what they needed?
Sorry but imo, you are completely wrong and have no evidence to back up your statement.
They picked the $120 because it was determined that was the amount needed to not have to make additional cuts last year.
Answer this question, you keep dodging it: would you or would you not cry foul if they had put an $80 parcel tax on the ballot, it passed, and then they had to lay teachers off because they only got two-thirds of what they needed?
“Sorry but imo, you are completely wrong and have no evidence to back up your statement.”
This response has the flavor of “where’s your proof!!!” schoolyard banter.
It would make no sense for the Board to risk all on a tax amount that they were told was likely to fail unless they had a follow-up plan. The premeditated political strategy of offering the voter a second, somewhat smaller, less onerous package(whether a tax or the size of a development)when dealing with a politically unpalatable measure is SOP. I seem to remember that DPD raised this scenerio himself in his blog sometime back.
“Sorry but imo, you are completely wrong and have no evidence to back up your statement.”
This response has the flavor of “where’s your proof!!!” schoolyard banter.
It would make no sense for the Board to risk all on a tax amount that they were told was likely to fail unless they had a follow-up plan. The premeditated political strategy of offering the voter a second, somewhat smaller, less onerous package(whether a tax or the size of a development)when dealing with a politically unpalatable measure is SOP. I seem to remember that DPD raised this scenerio himself in his blog sometime back.
“Sorry but imo, you are completely wrong and have no evidence to back up your statement.”
This response has the flavor of “where’s your proof!!!” schoolyard banter.
It would make no sense for the Board to risk all on a tax amount that they were told was likely to fail unless they had a follow-up plan. The premeditated political strategy of offering the voter a second, somewhat smaller, less onerous package(whether a tax or the size of a development)when dealing with a politically unpalatable measure is SOP. I seem to remember that DPD raised this scenerio himself in his blog sometime back.
“Sorry but imo, you are completely wrong and have no evidence to back up your statement.”
This response has the flavor of “where’s your proof!!!” schoolyard banter.
It would make no sense for the Board to risk all on a tax amount that they were told was likely to fail unless they had a follow-up plan. The premeditated political strategy of offering the voter a second, somewhat smaller, less onerous package(whether a tax or the size of a development)when dealing with a politically unpalatable measure is SOP. I seem to remember that DPD raised this scenerio himself in his blog sometime back.
I did raise the scenario and then they ran me through the numbers and posed the same question I posed to you. To me, I was persuaded by the logic.
Again, if you pass a parcel tax that you can get approved but it’s not enough to prevent teacher layoffs, what are the consequences of that? I think they would be devastating to all involved–teachers, district, board, and public. So based on that, I changed my mind on the number.
I did raise the scenario and then they ran me through the numbers and posed the same question I posed to you. To me, I was persuaded by the logic.
Again, if you pass a parcel tax that you can get approved but it’s not enough to prevent teacher layoffs, what are the consequences of that? I think they would be devastating to all involved–teachers, district, board, and public. So based on that, I changed my mind on the number.
I did raise the scenario and then they ran me through the numbers and posed the same question I posed to you. To me, I was persuaded by the logic.
Again, if you pass a parcel tax that you can get approved but it’s not enough to prevent teacher layoffs, what are the consequences of that? I think they would be devastating to all involved–teachers, district, board, and public. So based on that, I changed my mind on the number.
I did raise the scenario and then they ran me through the numbers and posed the same question I posed to you. To me, I was persuaded by the logic.
Again, if you pass a parcel tax that you can get approved but it’s not enough to prevent teacher layoffs, what are the consequences of that? I think they would be devastating to all involved–teachers, district, board, and public. So based on that, I changed my mind on the number.
“Valley Oak was not closed because of budget cuts as you propound. Valley Oak was closed before the state budget cuts hit. Ostensibly it was closed due to “declining enrollment”. But guess what? Enrollment at the elementary school level is up 75 students. The School District/Board got it wrong – yet again.”
This is the essence of why I will not vote for W. Doublespeak at every turn. No accountability.
“Valley Oak was not closed because of budget cuts as you propound. Valley Oak was closed before the state budget cuts hit. Ostensibly it was closed due to “declining enrollment”. But guess what? Enrollment at the elementary school level is up 75 students. The School District/Board got it wrong – yet again.”
This is the essence of why I will not vote for W. Doublespeak at every turn. No accountability.
“Valley Oak was not closed because of budget cuts as you propound. Valley Oak was closed before the state budget cuts hit. Ostensibly it was closed due to “declining enrollment”. But guess what? Enrollment at the elementary school level is up 75 students. The School District/Board got it wrong – yet again.”
This is the essence of why I will not vote for W. Doublespeak at every turn. No accountability.
“Valley Oak was not closed because of budget cuts as you propound. Valley Oak was closed before the state budget cuts hit. Ostensibly it was closed due to “declining enrollment”. But guess what? Enrollment at the elementary school level is up 75 students. The School District/Board got it wrong – yet again.”
This is the essence of why I will not vote for W. Doublespeak at every turn. No accountability.
I agree w previous post. If Valley Oak was closed because of declining enrollement, yet enrollment actually went up, then why reward the School District/Board for getting it wrong by giving them more money in the form of a parcel tax. So they can close Emerson?
I agree w previous post. If Valley Oak was closed because of declining enrollement, yet enrollment actually went up, then why reward the School District/Board for getting it wrong by giving them more money in the form of a parcel tax. So they can close Emerson?
I agree w previous post. If Valley Oak was closed because of declining enrollement, yet enrollment actually went up, then why reward the School District/Board for getting it wrong by giving them more money in the form of a parcel tax. So they can close Emerson?
I agree w previous post. If Valley Oak was closed because of declining enrollement, yet enrollment actually went up, then why reward the School District/Board for getting it wrong by giving them more money in the form of a parcel tax. So they can close Emerson?
Problem with that logic is that those who get hurt are the teachers who get laid off and the students whose schools close and teachers fired and classes canceled. You are punishing the wrong people!
Problem with that logic is that those who get hurt are the teachers who get laid off and the students whose schools close and teachers fired and classes canceled. You are punishing the wrong people!
Problem with that logic is that those who get hurt are the teachers who get laid off and the students whose schools close and teachers fired and classes canceled. You are punishing the wrong people!
Problem with that logic is that those who get hurt are the teachers who get laid off and the students whose schools close and teachers fired and classes canceled. You are punishing the wrong people!
I agree w previous post. If Valley Oak was closed because of declining enrollement, yet enrollment actually went up, then why reward the School District/Board for getting it wrong by giving them more money in the form of a parcel tax. So they can close Emerson?
But *why* did enrollments go up?
Did they go up because of cheap housing in Davis? (probably not)
I think they went up because Davis schools have a positive reputation — they have a good music program, they have credentialed librarians at all schools, a good elementary science program etc. Most districts don’t have this.
If you want to kill that demand for public education, then vote no on Measure W. If you want to see the possibility for enrollments to defy predictions of no growth or decline, then vote yes on Measure W.
We chose to move to Davis in large part because of the schools. In particular we appreciated that the community had shown enough commitment to the schools that they would supplement normal funds with past renewable parcel taxes.
If other potential new families look at Davis from the same perspective, then the recent high profile fundraising of DSF could only help to reinforce that reputation.
As for Emerson, if you want to give the district convenient cover to close Emerson, then vote *against* measure W.
If Measure W passes, then the school board will have to address the potential question of whether they really will have future room for students if they close Emerson.
Plus I agree with anon 11:59 that teachers and students get punished unfairly if Measure W fails.
I agree w previous post. If Valley Oak was closed because of declining enrollement, yet enrollment actually went up, then why reward the School District/Board for getting it wrong by giving them more money in the form of a parcel tax. So they can close Emerson?
But *why* did enrollments go up?
Did they go up because of cheap housing in Davis? (probably not)
I think they went up because Davis schools have a positive reputation — they have a good music program, they have credentialed librarians at all schools, a good elementary science program etc. Most districts don’t have this.
If you want to kill that demand for public education, then vote no on Measure W. If you want to see the possibility for enrollments to defy predictions of no growth or decline, then vote yes on Measure W.
We chose to move to Davis in large part because of the schools. In particular we appreciated that the community had shown enough commitment to the schools that they would supplement normal funds with past renewable parcel taxes.
If other potential new families look at Davis from the same perspective, then the recent high profile fundraising of DSF could only help to reinforce that reputation.
As for Emerson, if you want to give the district convenient cover to close Emerson, then vote *against* measure W.
If Measure W passes, then the school board will have to address the potential question of whether they really will have future room for students if they close Emerson.
Plus I agree with anon 11:59 that teachers and students get punished unfairly if Measure W fails.
I agree w previous post. If Valley Oak was closed because of declining enrollement, yet enrollment actually went up, then why reward the School District/Board for getting it wrong by giving them more money in the form of a parcel tax. So they can close Emerson?
But *why* did enrollments go up?
Did they go up because of cheap housing in Davis? (probably not)
I think they went up because Davis schools have a positive reputation — they have a good music program, they have credentialed librarians at all schools, a good elementary science program etc. Most districts don’t have this.
If you want to kill that demand for public education, then vote no on Measure W. If you want to see the possibility for enrollments to defy predictions of no growth or decline, then vote yes on Measure W.
We chose to move to Davis in large part because of the schools. In particular we appreciated that the community had shown enough commitment to the schools that they would supplement normal funds with past renewable parcel taxes.
If other potential new families look at Davis from the same perspective, then the recent high profile fundraising of DSF could only help to reinforce that reputation.
As for Emerson, if you want to give the district convenient cover to close Emerson, then vote *against* measure W.
If Measure W passes, then the school board will have to address the potential question of whether they really will have future room for students if they close Emerson.
Plus I agree with anon 11:59 that teachers and students get punished unfairly if Measure W fails.
I agree w previous post. If Valley Oak was closed because of declining enrollement, yet enrollment actually went up, then why reward the School District/Board for getting it wrong by giving them more money in the form of a parcel tax. So they can close Emerson?
But *why* did enrollments go up?
Did they go up because of cheap housing in Davis? (probably not)
I think they went up because Davis schools have a positive reputation — they have a good music program, they have credentialed librarians at all schools, a good elementary science program etc. Most districts don’t have this.
If you want to kill that demand for public education, then vote no on Measure W. If you want to see the possibility for enrollments to defy predictions of no growth or decline, then vote yes on Measure W.
We chose to move to Davis in large part because of the schools. In particular we appreciated that the community had shown enough commitment to the schools that they would supplement normal funds with past renewable parcel taxes.
If other potential new families look at Davis from the same perspective, then the recent high profile fundraising of DSF could only help to reinforce that reputation.
As for Emerson, if you want to give the district convenient cover to close Emerson, then vote *against* measure W.
If Measure W passes, then the school board will have to address the potential question of whether they really will have future room for students if they close Emerson.
Plus I agree with anon 11:59 that teachers and students get punished unfairly if Measure W fails.
Valley Oak was not closed because of “declining enrollment”. It was closed because with flat, declining, or slightly increasing enrollment, Davis could not support 10 elementary schools (including Korematsu). (If the elementary enrollment went up 75 students that means a little more than 9 students per school– I left out Fairfield because it is only K-3–which translates to about 1.5 kids a grade. It is not a whole lot!)
In the end, the BOE decided to close Valley Oak and open Korematsu.
As a parent whose children have been directly impacted by the closure of Valley Oak, I do not think that that decision should factor into whether or not one should support Measure W. I, for one, support it absolutely because ultimately I believe in education and investing in our children and the future.
I did not agree with the decision to close Valley Oak and open Korematsu. It has been painful and disruptive. Nonetheless, every child from Valley Oak will be sitting in a classroom receiving a quality education when school starts this week. If Measure W does not pass, the impacts will be much more far reaching than having to change schools. All the children in Davis will suffer those consequences including the Valley Oak kids who are already dealing with changing schools.
I am not prepared to see our k-3 kids in classrooms with more than 20 students. And, how big will the 4-6 grades need to get if we have to lay off teachers? What about those crucial 9th and 10th grade math and english classes that have lower enrollment in order to meet the needs of all of the kids? If we eliminate elementary school science, it will have a serious and direct impact on our Jr high and High School science programs.
I agree that the district needs to define our “core values” for programming. I know that it is on James Hammond’s agenda, but we have been and continue to be in crisis mode right now trying to save the program we have.
The reality is that the result will not satisfy everyone. People keep throwing out Mandarin 4 or 6 or whatever as an example of an unnecessary course; but does anyone on this blog really know how many students are enrolled in the course?? If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are enough students to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??
We also moved here not only for the quality education, but also because of the community commitment to that education. I would like to see that tradition continued.
Valley Oak was not closed because of “declining enrollment”. It was closed because with flat, declining, or slightly increasing enrollment, Davis could not support 10 elementary schools (including Korematsu). (If the elementary enrollment went up 75 students that means a little more than 9 students per school– I left out Fairfield because it is only K-3–which translates to about 1.5 kids a grade. It is not a whole lot!)
In the end, the BOE decided to close Valley Oak and open Korematsu.
As a parent whose children have been directly impacted by the closure of Valley Oak, I do not think that that decision should factor into whether or not one should support Measure W. I, for one, support it absolutely because ultimately I believe in education and investing in our children and the future.
I did not agree with the decision to close Valley Oak and open Korematsu. It has been painful and disruptive. Nonetheless, every child from Valley Oak will be sitting in a classroom receiving a quality education when school starts this week. If Measure W does not pass, the impacts will be much more far reaching than having to change schools. All the children in Davis will suffer those consequences including the Valley Oak kids who are already dealing with changing schools.
I am not prepared to see our k-3 kids in classrooms with more than 20 students. And, how big will the 4-6 grades need to get if we have to lay off teachers? What about those crucial 9th and 10th grade math and english classes that have lower enrollment in order to meet the needs of all of the kids? If we eliminate elementary school science, it will have a serious and direct impact on our Jr high and High School science programs.
I agree that the district needs to define our “core values” for programming. I know that it is on James Hammond’s agenda, but we have been and continue to be in crisis mode right now trying to save the program we have.
The reality is that the result will not satisfy everyone. People keep throwing out Mandarin 4 or 6 or whatever as an example of an unnecessary course; but does anyone on this blog really know how many students are enrolled in the course?? If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are enough students to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??
We also moved here not only for the quality education, but also because of the community commitment to that education. I would like to see that tradition continued.
Valley Oak was not closed because of “declining enrollment”. It was closed because with flat, declining, or slightly increasing enrollment, Davis could not support 10 elementary schools (including Korematsu). (If the elementary enrollment went up 75 students that means a little more than 9 students per school– I left out Fairfield because it is only K-3–which translates to about 1.5 kids a grade. It is not a whole lot!)
In the end, the BOE decided to close Valley Oak and open Korematsu.
As a parent whose children have been directly impacted by the closure of Valley Oak, I do not think that that decision should factor into whether or not one should support Measure W. I, for one, support it absolutely because ultimately I believe in education and investing in our children and the future.
I did not agree with the decision to close Valley Oak and open Korematsu. It has been painful and disruptive. Nonetheless, every child from Valley Oak will be sitting in a classroom receiving a quality education when school starts this week. If Measure W does not pass, the impacts will be much more far reaching than having to change schools. All the children in Davis will suffer those consequences including the Valley Oak kids who are already dealing with changing schools.
I am not prepared to see our k-3 kids in classrooms with more than 20 students. And, how big will the 4-6 grades need to get if we have to lay off teachers? What about those crucial 9th and 10th grade math and english classes that have lower enrollment in order to meet the needs of all of the kids? If we eliminate elementary school science, it will have a serious and direct impact on our Jr high and High School science programs.
I agree that the district needs to define our “core values” for programming. I know that it is on James Hammond’s agenda, but we have been and continue to be in crisis mode right now trying to save the program we have.
The reality is that the result will not satisfy everyone. People keep throwing out Mandarin 4 or 6 or whatever as an example of an unnecessary course; but does anyone on this blog really know how many students are enrolled in the course?? If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are enough students to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??
We also moved here not only for the quality education, but also because of the community commitment to that education. I would like to see that tradition continued.
Valley Oak was not closed because of “declining enrollment”. It was closed because with flat, declining, or slightly increasing enrollment, Davis could not support 10 elementary schools (including Korematsu). (If the elementary enrollment went up 75 students that means a little more than 9 students per school– I left out Fairfield because it is only K-3–which translates to about 1.5 kids a grade. It is not a whole lot!)
In the end, the BOE decided to close Valley Oak and open Korematsu.
As a parent whose children have been directly impacted by the closure of Valley Oak, I do not think that that decision should factor into whether or not one should support Measure W. I, for one, support it absolutely because ultimately I believe in education and investing in our children and the future.
I did not agree with the decision to close Valley Oak and open Korematsu. It has been painful and disruptive. Nonetheless, every child from Valley Oak will be sitting in a classroom receiving a quality education when school starts this week. If Measure W does not pass, the impacts will be much more far reaching than having to change schools. All the children in Davis will suffer those consequences including the Valley Oak kids who are already dealing with changing schools.
I am not prepared to see our k-3 kids in classrooms with more than 20 students. And, how big will the 4-6 grades need to get if we have to lay off teachers? What about those crucial 9th and 10th grade math and english classes that have lower enrollment in order to meet the needs of all of the kids? If we eliminate elementary school science, it will have a serious and direct impact on our Jr high and High School science programs.
I agree that the district needs to define our “core values” for programming. I know that it is on James Hammond’s agenda, but we have been and continue to be in crisis mode right now trying to save the program we have.
The reality is that the result will not satisfy everyone. People keep throwing out Mandarin 4 or 6 or whatever as an example of an unnecessary course; but does anyone on this blog really know how many students are enrolled in the course?? If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are enough students to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??
We also moved here not only for the quality education, but also because of the community commitment to that education. I would like to see that tradition continued.
“The reality is that the result will not satisfy everyone. People keep throwing out Mandarin 4 or 6 or whatever as an example of an unnecessary course; but does anyone on this blog really know how many students are enrolled in the course?? If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are enough students to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??”
Because the taxpayer does not have a bottomless pocket. It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them. When fiscal times are tough, families have to budget because there is not enough money to go around. It is no different for the School Board/District. Problem is they don’t want to budget. They want to save every program we have, whether it is financially feasible or not, and then institute new programs on top of that, like having elementary school kids grow 35 lb cabbages. Enough is enough!!!
“The reality is that the result will not satisfy everyone. People keep throwing out Mandarin 4 or 6 or whatever as an example of an unnecessary course; but does anyone on this blog really know how many students are enrolled in the course?? If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are enough students to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??”
Because the taxpayer does not have a bottomless pocket. It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them. When fiscal times are tough, families have to budget because there is not enough money to go around. It is no different for the School Board/District. Problem is they don’t want to budget. They want to save every program we have, whether it is financially feasible or not, and then institute new programs on top of that, like having elementary school kids grow 35 lb cabbages. Enough is enough!!!
“The reality is that the result will not satisfy everyone. People keep throwing out Mandarin 4 or 6 or whatever as an example of an unnecessary course; but does anyone on this blog really know how many students are enrolled in the course?? If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are enough students to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??”
Because the taxpayer does not have a bottomless pocket. It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them. When fiscal times are tough, families have to budget because there is not enough money to go around. It is no different for the School Board/District. Problem is they don’t want to budget. They want to save every program we have, whether it is financially feasible or not, and then institute new programs on top of that, like having elementary school kids grow 35 lb cabbages. Enough is enough!!!
“The reality is that the result will not satisfy everyone. People keep throwing out Mandarin 4 or 6 or whatever as an example of an unnecessary course; but does anyone on this blog really know how many students are enrolled in the course?? If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are enough students to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??”
Because the taxpayer does not have a bottomless pocket. It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them. When fiscal times are tough, families have to budget because there is not enough money to go around. It is no different for the School Board/District. Problem is they don’t want to budget. They want to save every program we have, whether it is financially feasible or not, and then institute new programs on top of that, like having elementary school kids grow 35 lb cabbages. Enough is enough!!!
Hey, the reason given for the closure of Valley Oak was specifically “declining enrollment”. In fact enrollment has increased. The School Board/District got it wrong, wrong, wrong, and needlessly closed an entire school because of it. Shame, shame, shame!
Hey, the reason given for the closure of Valley Oak was specifically “declining enrollment”. In fact enrollment has increased. The School Board/District got it wrong, wrong, wrong, and needlessly closed an entire school because of it. Shame, shame, shame!
Hey, the reason given for the closure of Valley Oak was specifically “declining enrollment”. In fact enrollment has increased. The School Board/District got it wrong, wrong, wrong, and needlessly closed an entire school because of it. Shame, shame, shame!
Hey, the reason given for the closure of Valley Oak was specifically “declining enrollment”. In fact enrollment has increased. The School Board/District got it wrong, wrong, wrong, and needlessly closed an entire school because of it. Shame, shame, shame!
In fact enrollment has increased.
Okay, but *why* did enrollments go up?
Did they go up because of cheap housing in Davis? (probably not)
I think they went up because Davis schools have a positive reputation — they have a good music program, they have credentialed librarians at all schools, a good elementary science program etc. Most districts don’t have this.
If you want to kill that demand for good public education, then vote no on Measure W. If you want to see the enrollments defy predictions of no growth or decline, then vote yes on Measure W.
In fact enrollment has increased.
Okay, but *why* did enrollments go up?
Did they go up because of cheap housing in Davis? (probably not)
I think they went up because Davis schools have a positive reputation — they have a good music program, they have credentialed librarians at all schools, a good elementary science program etc. Most districts don’t have this.
If you want to kill that demand for good public education, then vote no on Measure W. If you want to see the enrollments defy predictions of no growth or decline, then vote yes on Measure W.
In fact enrollment has increased.
Okay, but *why* did enrollments go up?
Did they go up because of cheap housing in Davis? (probably not)
I think they went up because Davis schools have a positive reputation — they have a good music program, they have credentialed librarians at all schools, a good elementary science program etc. Most districts don’t have this.
If you want to kill that demand for good public education, then vote no on Measure W. If you want to see the enrollments defy predictions of no growth or decline, then vote yes on Measure W.
In fact enrollment has increased.
Okay, but *why* did enrollments go up?
Did they go up because of cheap housing in Davis? (probably not)
I think they went up because Davis schools have a positive reputation — they have a good music program, they have credentialed librarians at all schools, a good elementary science program etc. Most districts don’t have this.
If you want to kill that demand for good public education, then vote no on Measure W. If you want to see the enrollments defy predictions of no growth or decline, then vote yes on Measure W.
“It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them.”
You make my point exactly. I said, “If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are ENOUGH STUDENTS to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??”
If, indeed, there were only 5 kids in the class then that would not be enough to support the class. But, that would then hold true for any advanced language course– French, Spanish, Italian, German, whatever.
There must be criteria for the appropriate student to faculty ratio in order to best utilize our financial and professional resources.
I, for one, would love to see the staffing ratios at the High School so we could have an honest discussion about where the resources are going and where “budgeting” needs to be done. Right now the conversation feels more speculative than productive. Are there really only 5 kids in Mandarin or is that a rumor that has become reality because it has been repeated so often. I have no idea.
“It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them.”
You make my point exactly. I said, “If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are ENOUGH STUDENTS to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??”
If, indeed, there were only 5 kids in the class then that would not be enough to support the class. But, that would then hold true for any advanced language course– French, Spanish, Italian, German, whatever.
There must be criteria for the appropriate student to faculty ratio in order to best utilize our financial and professional resources.
I, for one, would love to see the staffing ratios at the High School so we could have an honest discussion about where the resources are going and where “budgeting” needs to be done. Right now the conversation feels more speculative than productive. Are there really only 5 kids in Mandarin or is that a rumor that has become reality because it has been repeated so often. I have no idea.
“It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them.”
You make my point exactly. I said, “If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are ENOUGH STUDENTS to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??”
If, indeed, there were only 5 kids in the class then that would not be enough to support the class. But, that would then hold true for any advanced language course– French, Spanish, Italian, German, whatever.
There must be criteria for the appropriate student to faculty ratio in order to best utilize our financial and professional resources.
I, for one, would love to see the staffing ratios at the High School so we could have an honest discussion about where the resources are going and where “budgeting” needs to be done. Right now the conversation feels more speculative than productive. Are there really only 5 kids in Mandarin or is that a rumor that has become reality because it has been repeated so often. I have no idea.
“It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them.”
You make my point exactly. I said, “If we support advanced foreign language in general and there are ENOUGH STUDENTS to fill an advanced Mandarin course, then why shouldn’t it be offered??”
If, indeed, there were only 5 kids in the class then that would not be enough to support the class. But, that would then hold true for any advanced language course– French, Spanish, Italian, German, whatever.
There must be criteria for the appropriate student to faculty ratio in order to best utilize our financial and professional resources.
I, for one, would love to see the staffing ratios at the High School so we could have an honest discussion about where the resources are going and where “budgeting” needs to be done. Right now the conversation feels more speculative than productive. Are there really only 5 kids in Mandarin or is that a rumor that has become reality because it has been repeated so often. I have no idea.
To add to the rumor mill, what I have heard is that the upper level Mandarin classes are combined so that you don’t have a big empty classroom with 5 students in it, you have a full classroom with combined Mandarin 3/4/5 or whatever the levels are. Maybe there are only 5 kids taking level 5 but they are sharing a classroom with kids at a somewhat lower level.
Don’t know if it’s true, but that is what I have heard.
To add to the rumor mill, what I have heard is that the upper level Mandarin classes are combined so that you don’t have a big empty classroom with 5 students in it, you have a full classroom with combined Mandarin 3/4/5 or whatever the levels are. Maybe there are only 5 kids taking level 5 but they are sharing a classroom with kids at a somewhat lower level.
Don’t know if it’s true, but that is what I have heard.
To add to the rumor mill, what I have heard is that the upper level Mandarin classes are combined so that you don’t have a big empty classroom with 5 students in it, you have a full classroom with combined Mandarin 3/4/5 or whatever the levels are. Maybe there are only 5 kids taking level 5 but they are sharing a classroom with kids at a somewhat lower level.
Don’t know if it’s true, but that is what I have heard.
To add to the rumor mill, what I have heard is that the upper level Mandarin classes are combined so that you don’t have a big empty classroom with 5 students in it, you have a full classroom with combined Mandarin 3/4/5 or whatever the levels are. Maybe there are only 5 kids taking level 5 but they are sharing a classroom with kids at a somewhat lower level.
Don’t know if it’s true, but that is what I have heard.
It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them.
Staffing ratios (enrollment numbers in classes) have been discussed at recent board meetings as part of the regular admin. staff reports. I have not paid specific attention staffing ratios because I didn’t hear anything that particularly alarmed me at the time. That’s why I can’t say at the moment what the enrollment are for Mandarin 4 or 5 (or whatever), or how the class is structured (a “combo” class or separate classes).
If you have a further interest in investigating this issue, you can find archived video for school board meetings here, and past agenda items here. Past agendas include meeting minutes which can be found in the consent calendar of each meeting agenda. One can also place a public information request with the district office for enrollment information. The district has a general policy of responding to public information requests within a week.
If I had the time and the burning desire to know this info right now, I would follow up myself.
It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them.
Staffing ratios (enrollment numbers in classes) have been discussed at recent board meetings as part of the regular admin. staff reports. I have not paid specific attention staffing ratios because I didn’t hear anything that particularly alarmed me at the time. That’s why I can’t say at the moment what the enrollment are for Mandarin 4 or 5 (or whatever), or how the class is structured (a “combo” class or separate classes).
If you have a further interest in investigating this issue, you can find archived video for school board meetings here, and past agenda items here. Past agendas include meeting minutes which can be found in the consent calendar of each meeting agenda. One can also place a public information request with the district office for enrollment information. The district has a general policy of responding to public information requests within a week.
If I had the time and the burning desire to know this info right now, I would follow up myself.
It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them.
Staffing ratios (enrollment numbers in classes) have been discussed at recent board meetings as part of the regular admin. staff reports. I have not paid specific attention staffing ratios because I didn’t hear anything that particularly alarmed me at the time. That’s why I can’t say at the moment what the enrollment are for Mandarin 4 or 5 (or whatever), or how the class is structured (a “combo” class or separate classes).
If you have a further interest in investigating this issue, you can find archived video for school board meetings here, and past agenda items here. Past agendas include meeting minutes which can be found in the consent calendar of each meeting agenda. One can also place a public information request with the district office for enrollment information. The district has a general policy of responding to public information requests within a week.
If I had the time and the burning desire to know this info right now, I would follow up myself.
It is also my understanding that some of the Mandarin Chinese classes had as little as five students in them.
Staffing ratios (enrollment numbers in classes) have been discussed at recent board meetings as part of the regular admin. staff reports. I have not paid specific attention staffing ratios because I didn’t hear anything that particularly alarmed me at the time. That’s why I can’t say at the moment what the enrollment are for Mandarin 4 or 5 (or whatever), or how the class is structured (a “combo” class or separate classes).
If you have a further interest in investigating this issue, you can find archived video for school board meetings here, and past agenda items here. Past agendas include meeting minutes which can be found in the consent calendar of each meeting agenda. One can also place a public information request with the district office for enrollment information. The district has a general policy of responding to public information requests within a week.
If I had the time and the burning desire to know this info right now, I would follow up myself.
It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community to determine the chances for passage of a parcel tax at the $80 or $140 levels. Measure W should have been crafted so that the district’s needs would be met over the years where there is a projected shortfall. There is no need to poll the public if the amount being requested is truly needed to maintain current programs. Another issue that is even more problematic for the school district is that even if Measure W passes, it sunsets exactly when Measure Q ends. At that point, the school district will have to request an even larger parcel tax, one that will undoubtedly exceed the sum of Measures Q and W. These are issues that the School Board must recognize and address when making such monetary requests from the public.
It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community to determine the chances for passage of a parcel tax at the $80 or $140 levels. Measure W should have been crafted so that the district’s needs would be met over the years where there is a projected shortfall. There is no need to poll the public if the amount being requested is truly needed to maintain current programs. Another issue that is even more problematic for the school district is that even if Measure W passes, it sunsets exactly when Measure Q ends. At that point, the school district will have to request an even larger parcel tax, one that will undoubtedly exceed the sum of Measures Q and W. These are issues that the School Board must recognize and address when making such monetary requests from the public.
It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community to determine the chances for passage of a parcel tax at the $80 or $140 levels. Measure W should have been crafted so that the district’s needs would be met over the years where there is a projected shortfall. There is no need to poll the public if the amount being requested is truly needed to maintain current programs. Another issue that is even more problematic for the school district is that even if Measure W passes, it sunsets exactly when Measure Q ends. At that point, the school district will have to request an even larger parcel tax, one that will undoubtedly exceed the sum of Measures Q and W. These are issues that the School Board must recognize and address when making such monetary requests from the public.
It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community to determine the chances for passage of a parcel tax at the $80 or $140 levels. Measure W should have been crafted so that the district’s needs would be met over the years where there is a projected shortfall. There is no need to poll the public if the amount being requested is truly needed to maintain current programs. Another issue that is even more problematic for the school district is that even if Measure W passes, it sunsets exactly when Measure Q ends. At that point, the school district will have to request an even larger parcel tax, one that will undoubtedly exceed the sum of Measures Q and W. These are issues that the School Board must recognize and address when making such monetary requests from the public.
“It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community to determine the chances for passage of a parcel tax at the $80 or $140 levels.”
As I explained above, you do not simply conduct a poll to get the number of people who support a given proposition, you poll to get an understanding of the public mood, to determine the feasibility of the initiative, to determine the parameters of the initiative, to determine people’s concerns about the initiative, about the district, the general climate. All of these things help shape a decision on whether to run, but also a decision on how to run. Just because they didn’t pick the number that might have been easiest to pass, does not make hiring a polling company to poll the public is a waste of time, there is a lot valuable data to be gleaned from it. Everything that people have expressed as a concern on this blog came up in both the poll and the focus groups. Very valuable.
“It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community to determine the chances for passage of a parcel tax at the $80 or $140 levels.”
As I explained above, you do not simply conduct a poll to get the number of people who support a given proposition, you poll to get an understanding of the public mood, to determine the feasibility of the initiative, to determine the parameters of the initiative, to determine people’s concerns about the initiative, about the district, the general climate. All of these things help shape a decision on whether to run, but also a decision on how to run. Just because they didn’t pick the number that might have been easiest to pass, does not make hiring a polling company to poll the public is a waste of time, there is a lot valuable data to be gleaned from it. Everything that people have expressed as a concern on this blog came up in both the poll and the focus groups. Very valuable.
“It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community to determine the chances for passage of a parcel tax at the $80 or $140 levels.”
As I explained above, you do not simply conduct a poll to get the number of people who support a given proposition, you poll to get an understanding of the public mood, to determine the feasibility of the initiative, to determine the parameters of the initiative, to determine people’s concerns about the initiative, about the district, the general climate. All of these things help shape a decision on whether to run, but also a decision on how to run. Just because they didn’t pick the number that might have been easiest to pass, does not make hiring a polling company to poll the public is a waste of time, there is a lot valuable data to be gleaned from it. Everything that people have expressed as a concern on this blog came up in both the poll and the focus groups. Very valuable.
“It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community to determine the chances for passage of a parcel tax at the $80 or $140 levels.”
As I explained above, you do not simply conduct a poll to get the number of people who support a given proposition, you poll to get an understanding of the public mood, to determine the feasibility of the initiative, to determine the parameters of the initiative, to determine people’s concerns about the initiative, about the district, the general climate. All of these things help shape a decision on whether to run, but also a decision on how to run. Just because they didn’t pick the number that might have been easiest to pass, does not make hiring a polling company to poll the public is a waste of time, there is a lot valuable data to be gleaned from it. Everything that people have expressed as a concern on this blog came up in both the poll and the focus groups. Very valuable.
On the issue of five students in a class, I concur with what wdf has stated.
On the issue of five students in a class, I concur with what wdf has stated.
On the issue of five students in a class, I concur with what wdf has stated.
On the issue of five students in a class, I concur with what wdf has stated.
“It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community….”
After many years of Council and Board “watching”, it is clear that the main reason for hiring consultants is an attempt to insulate elected officials from being solely responsible for the conclusions that they come to.
I am having a difficult time remembering a consultant’s opinion that did not support what was reasonably known to be the Council or Board majority’s inclination on the issue at hand. The calculated VO polling format whose results spelled the doom of VO Elementary spelled is an excellent recent example.
“It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community….”
After many years of Council and Board “watching”, it is clear that the main reason for hiring consultants is an attempt to insulate elected officials from being solely responsible for the conclusions that they come to.
I am having a difficult time remembering a consultant’s opinion that did not support what was reasonably known to be the Council or Board majority’s inclination on the issue at hand. The calculated VO polling format whose results spelled the doom of VO Elementary spelled is an excellent recent example.
“It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community….”
After many years of Council and Board “watching”, it is clear that the main reason for hiring consultants is an attempt to insulate elected officials from being solely responsible for the conclusions that they come to.
I am having a difficult time remembering a consultant’s opinion that did not support what was reasonably known to be the Council or Board majority’s inclination on the issue at hand. The calculated VO polling format whose results spelled the doom of VO Elementary spelled is an excellent recent example.
“It is unclear to me why the school board hired consultants to poll the community….”
After many years of Council and Board “watching”, it is clear that the main reason for hiring consultants is an attempt to insulate elected officials from being solely responsible for the conclusions that they come to.
I am having a difficult time remembering a consultant’s opinion that did not support what was reasonably known to be the Council or Board majority’s inclination on the issue at hand. The calculated VO polling format whose results spelled the doom of VO Elementary spelled is an excellent recent example.
“After many years of Council and Board “watching”, it is clear that the main reason for hiring consultants is an attempt to insulate elected officials from being solely responsible for the conclusions that they come to.”
Are you suggesting that they shouldn’t have hired a pollster at all and blindly guessed at what the electorate was thinking?
Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the district?
That the school board shouldn’t be asking for outside professional advice?
That there are very few if any legitimate reasons to hire consultants?
I don’t quite understand the point of your argument, here.
“After many years of Council and Board “watching”, it is clear that the main reason for hiring consultants is an attempt to insulate elected officials from being solely responsible for the conclusions that they come to.”
Are you suggesting that they shouldn’t have hired a pollster at all and blindly guessed at what the electorate was thinking?
Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the district?
That the school board shouldn’t be asking for outside professional advice?
That there are very few if any legitimate reasons to hire consultants?
I don’t quite understand the point of your argument, here.
“After many years of Council and Board “watching”, it is clear that the main reason for hiring consultants is an attempt to insulate elected officials from being solely responsible for the conclusions that they come to.”
Are you suggesting that they shouldn’t have hired a pollster at all and blindly guessed at what the electorate was thinking?
Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the district?
That the school board shouldn’t be asking for outside professional advice?
That there are very few if any legitimate reasons to hire consultants?
I don’t quite understand the point of your argument, here.
“After many years of Council and Board “watching”, it is clear that the main reason for hiring consultants is an attempt to insulate elected officials from being solely responsible for the conclusions that they come to.”
Are you suggesting that they shouldn’t have hired a pollster at all and blindly guessed at what the electorate was thinking?
Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the district?
That the school board shouldn’t be asking for outside professional advice?
That there are very few if any legitimate reasons to hire consultants?
I don’t quite understand the point of your argument, here.
“Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the district?”
Should have read:
Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the *hired consultant*?
“Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the district?”
Should have read:
Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the *hired consultant*?
“Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the district?”
Should have read:
Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the *hired consultant*?
“Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the district?”
Should have read:
Or that the school district should have run the poll instead of the *hired consultant*?
Did I miss something, or are we still waiting for Don Shor to “comment more on the specifics shortly”?
Did I miss something, or are we still waiting for Don Shor to “comment more on the specifics shortly”?
Did I miss something, or are we still waiting for Don Shor to “comment more on the specifics shortly”?
Did I miss something, or are we still waiting for Don Shor to “comment more on the specifics shortly”?