For a group of school board members that were trying to avoid making a decision at midnight, it seems that they did exactly that.
The Davis Joint Unified School Board met last night with a large group of parents and students from both the Emerson Junior High and the Montessori school in attendance. That group considerably thinned out by the time the board reached a consensus.
No final decision was made last night and there was an announced special meeting after spring break at Emerson Junior High itself where parents and students will be able to weigh in.
Last night, a joint team of staff presented the school board with seven different options. The bleakness of the situation was fully laid out by CBO Bruce Colby in terms of the need to cut money, when additional money might become available, and the prospects for future budgets.
Janet Berry and Alan Anderson of the Davis Schools Foundation gave us the good news that they have now raised over $100,000. For those who caught the Vanguard radio show this week, Alan Anderson was one of our guests. You may listen to that radio show by scrolling down the right sidebar and clicking on Wednesday’s date.
During the first portion of public comments, students and parents urged the board to save the Montessori program. During the second , portion of public comments, students and parents urged the board to keep Emerson open.
By the end of the evening, it seemed that keeping Emerson open was indeed a distinct possibility. The board consensus favored plan G, precisely because it keep Emerson Junior High open. However, it does create pretty much a crazy configuration, in that one cannot quite figure out exactly how it saves money.
Basically, it takes 9th graders and moves them to high schools. There were expressed concerns about that move and there are a number of advantages to having only a 10th through 12th grade high school. But it is probably better than some of the alternatives given the budget situation.
It then moves Da Vinci high to the Emerson campus–and the Da Vinci program becomes a 9th grade through 12th grade high school. With this selection, all three junior high schools become 7th through 8th grade schools.
The enrollment breakdown is 2,342 for Davis High, 430 for Da Vinci, 500 for Harper, 449 for Holmes, and 346 for Emerson. In otherwords, three very small junior highs.
What I do not understand, is how this exactly saves money. They argue that it saves $120,000 in a site administrator, however, there are moving costs and the costs of a science portable for Da Vinci.
Savings may occur with the economy of scale at the high school program. Having 9th through 12th grade may increase the number of fully loaded course options, it may improve the availability of electives, and it may allow some of the low-enrolled classes to remain sustainable.
The biggest savings may be that according to staff, 9th through 12th grade students are required to have roughly 83 additional instructional minutes per day than 7th through 8th grade students. Because the Junior Highs are 7th through 9th, 7th and 8th grade students receive the same instruction as 9th graders are required to receive. That is of course an academic advantage to have an additional course offering, but eliminating this by having 9th through 12th grade students together presents a way to save money.
There are also big disadvantages. Da Vinci is required now to quickly recruit 9th graders, they no longer can enroll in DHS classes concurrently, they need to lease an additional 100 computers, and they have to maintain current levels of enrollment despite location and staffing changes.
Emerson now effectively becomes a 7th through 12th grade school which may invite problems.
The junior high schools are dangerously small. They are well under capacity and any advantage of economy of scale for the high schools is negated by the small nature of the junior highs.
Also, there remains facility upgrade needs. They are talking about $10 million in facilities upgrades at Emerson, however, most of it is not safety or structurally related. CBO Bruce Colby told the board that Emerson did not qualify for state emergency aid. Currently they only have a few million in the facilities funds.
Finally, as we suspected, the board would be required to find an additional budget reduction of nearly $450K under this option.
One of the more interesting parts of the discussion was the state’s process for converted surplus property into general fund money. Basically the school district would have declared that they had no facilities needs, that they have completed all facilities projects. They could then sell Grande or Nugget fields and use the money for the general fund. However, the penalty is steep, as they would not be able to get state money for facilities for the next 10 years. Frankly, I do not understand why the state has such requirements. It seems much easier to raise money for facilities than for the general fund. For instance, they cannot take out a COP to fund general fund programs, but they could take out such a debt instrument to fund facilities.
A final point is that they are going to finally upgrade their facilities master plan which I think has not been upgraded since about 2000. That process will take roughly four months.
In the final analysis here, it seems that the board was not willing to close Emerson. For residents in West Davis, that would be a welcome change of course, but overall it does not make the picture look much less bleak.
In the end, despite the heroic efforts of the Davis Schools Foundation, despite the mobilization of parents and students across the city, we need a hard and reliable source of money and that will require another parcel tax.
While these cuts are painful, we should bear in mind how fortunate we are. Many communities lack the resources to be able to raise money privately to alleviate the pain of these budget cuts. Many communities lack the resources to be able to pass another parcel tax. Many communities lack the political will to do so. It remains to be seen if this community will be able to. My guess is that when push comes to shove it will and as a result, the students will be alright.
The bigger picture is one we also need to look at. We need to fund our education in California in a more reliable way that is not nearly as reliant on demographic shifts or vulnerable to economic downturns. That will be the challenge not for our school board, but for our legislature in the coming weeks, months, and unfortunately, but most probably, in the coming years.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Difficult discussions to have and difficult decisions to be made. I don’t think anyone on the board or on the district staff is enjoying the financial reality of the situation.
But Option G strikes me as an odd one. Emerson becomes a 7-12? How good is it to have high school seniors (17-18) mixing with 7th graders (12-13)? Is there adequate parking for both staff and students, given that high school juniors/seniors drive? How do we share the facility?
And if we are keeping Emerson open, we are still needing to trim $450,000 out of the budget. Where does that come from? Do we find more services/programs to cut? Libraries and elementary music and science are already on the chopping block. What’s next?
There are no perfect answers to this lousy situation. Maybe we can hope the May revise of the budget offers some brighter horizon.
Difficult discussions to have and difficult decisions to be made. I don’t think anyone on the board or on the district staff is enjoying the financial reality of the situation.
But Option G strikes me as an odd one. Emerson becomes a 7-12? How good is it to have high school seniors (17-18) mixing with 7th graders (12-13)? Is there adequate parking for both staff and students, given that high school juniors/seniors drive? How do we share the facility?
And if we are keeping Emerson open, we are still needing to trim $450,000 out of the budget. Where does that come from? Do we find more services/programs to cut? Libraries and elementary music and science are already on the chopping block. What’s next?
There are no perfect answers to this lousy situation. Maybe we can hope the May revise of the budget offers some brighter horizon.
Difficult discussions to have and difficult decisions to be made. I don’t think anyone on the board or on the district staff is enjoying the financial reality of the situation.
But Option G strikes me as an odd one. Emerson becomes a 7-12? How good is it to have high school seniors (17-18) mixing with 7th graders (12-13)? Is there adequate parking for both staff and students, given that high school juniors/seniors drive? How do we share the facility?
And if we are keeping Emerson open, we are still needing to trim $450,000 out of the budget. Where does that come from? Do we find more services/programs to cut? Libraries and elementary music and science are already on the chopping block. What’s next?
There are no perfect answers to this lousy situation. Maybe we can hope the May revise of the budget offers some brighter horizon.
Difficult discussions to have and difficult decisions to be made. I don’t think anyone on the board or on the district staff is enjoying the financial reality of the situation.
But Option G strikes me as an odd one. Emerson becomes a 7-12? How good is it to have high school seniors (17-18) mixing with 7th graders (12-13)? Is there adequate parking for both staff and students, given that high school juniors/seniors drive? How do we share the facility?
And if we are keeping Emerson open, we are still needing to trim $450,000 out of the budget. Where does that come from? Do we find more services/programs to cut? Libraries and elementary music and science are already on the chopping block. What’s next?
There are no perfect answers to this lousy situation. Maybe we can hope the May revise of the budget offers some brighter horizon.
Should be an interesting year at DaVinci- they are scheduled to lose 75% of their instructors, add an entire additional class year without any sort of academic plan, move away from the high school where the students will continue to be obligated to take classes and move their entire campus to the other end of town…
How much gets saved under this rather bizarre notion? Wouldn’t it just be easier to lay-out a series of options and attach a dollar amount to them. Whichever ones get fully-funded continue to exist.
In short- have parents put your money where your mouths are.
Should be an interesting year at DaVinci- they are scheduled to lose 75% of their instructors, add an entire additional class year without any sort of academic plan, move away from the high school where the students will continue to be obligated to take classes and move their entire campus to the other end of town…
How much gets saved under this rather bizarre notion? Wouldn’t it just be easier to lay-out a series of options and attach a dollar amount to them. Whichever ones get fully-funded continue to exist.
In short- have parents put your money where your mouths are.
Should be an interesting year at DaVinci- they are scheduled to lose 75% of their instructors, add an entire additional class year without any sort of academic plan, move away from the high school where the students will continue to be obligated to take classes and move their entire campus to the other end of town…
How much gets saved under this rather bizarre notion? Wouldn’t it just be easier to lay-out a series of options and attach a dollar amount to them. Whichever ones get fully-funded continue to exist.
In short- have parents put your money where your mouths are.
Should be an interesting year at DaVinci- they are scheduled to lose 75% of their instructors, add an entire additional class year without any sort of academic plan, move away from the high school where the students will continue to be obligated to take classes and move their entire campus to the other end of town…
How much gets saved under this rather bizarre notion? Wouldn’t it just be easier to lay-out a series of options and attach a dollar amount to them. Whichever ones get fully-funded continue to exist.
In short- have parents put your money where your mouths are.
Attaching a dollar amount to preferred options, although maybe preferrable by those who want to ‘save’ specific programs, would end up pitting program vs. program.
Let’s say that DaVinci’s community is particulary mobilized, but that Library people aren’t? Or Elementary Music’s community is mobilized but Foreign Language or Elementary Science is not? Do we then see competing groups fundraising each other at the Farmer’s Market and other places?
I worry about the tension that such a result could produce.
Attaching a dollar amount to preferred options, although maybe preferrable by those who want to ‘save’ specific programs, would end up pitting program vs. program.
Let’s say that DaVinci’s community is particulary mobilized, but that Library people aren’t? Or Elementary Music’s community is mobilized but Foreign Language or Elementary Science is not? Do we then see competing groups fundraising each other at the Farmer’s Market and other places?
I worry about the tension that such a result could produce.
Attaching a dollar amount to preferred options, although maybe preferrable by those who want to ‘save’ specific programs, would end up pitting program vs. program.
Let’s say that DaVinci’s community is particulary mobilized, but that Library people aren’t? Or Elementary Music’s community is mobilized but Foreign Language or Elementary Science is not? Do we then see competing groups fundraising each other at the Farmer’s Market and other places?
I worry about the tension that such a result could produce.
Attaching a dollar amount to preferred options, although maybe preferrable by those who want to ‘save’ specific programs, would end up pitting program vs. program.
Let’s say that DaVinci’s community is particulary mobilized, but that Library people aren’t? Or Elementary Music’s community is mobilized but Foreign Language or Elementary Science is not? Do we then see competing groups fundraising each other at the Farmer’s Market and other places?
I worry about the tension that such a result could produce.
It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!! NOW… the board tries to be “creative” as they jump through hoops for the West Davis parents. Where was their “creativity” when they slammed the doors shut on Valley Oak?
It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!! NOW… the board tries to be “creative” as they jump through hoops for the West Davis parents. Where was their “creativity” when they slammed the doors shut on Valley Oak?
It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!! NOW… the board tries to be “creative” as they jump through hoops for the West Davis parents. Where was their “creativity” when they slammed the doors shut on Valley Oak?
It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!! NOW… the board tries to be “creative” as they jump through hoops for the West Davis parents. Where was their “creativity” when they slammed the doors shut on Valley Oak?
“It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax”
This seems selfish. I can understand why people are angry over cuts, but to reject the school district is a rejection of all of the kids in the community.
“It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax”
This seems selfish. I can understand why people are angry over cuts, but to reject the school district is a rejection of all of the kids in the community.
“It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax”
This seems selfish. I can understand why people are angry over cuts, but to reject the school district is a rejection of all of the kids in the community.
“It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax”
This seems selfish. I can understand why people are angry over cuts, but to reject the school district is a rejection of all of the kids in the community.
Why don’t we make Holmes the 9-12 Da Vinci High School and make Emerson and Harper 7-8 with about 675 students each? This would keep the enrollment up at the middle schools and help preserve the electives that would suffer with a smaller student body size at three middle school campuses. This would also put Da Vinci close enough to Davis High so that the Da Vinci students could take elective classes at Davis High. As a disclaimer, I live in East Davis and have children in the district currently. I realize this would be another change for East Davis but I would feel better about this change in configuration than I did about closing Valley Oak. I believe changing the middle school configurations would actually benefit the students unlike the needless displacement and destruction to needed programs that closing Valley Oak will do.
Why don’t we make Holmes the 9-12 Da Vinci High School and make Emerson and Harper 7-8 with about 675 students each? This would keep the enrollment up at the middle schools and help preserve the electives that would suffer with a smaller student body size at three middle school campuses. This would also put Da Vinci close enough to Davis High so that the Da Vinci students could take elective classes at Davis High. As a disclaimer, I live in East Davis and have children in the district currently. I realize this would be another change for East Davis but I would feel better about this change in configuration than I did about closing Valley Oak. I believe changing the middle school configurations would actually benefit the students unlike the needless displacement and destruction to needed programs that closing Valley Oak will do.
Why don’t we make Holmes the 9-12 Da Vinci High School and make Emerson and Harper 7-8 with about 675 students each? This would keep the enrollment up at the middle schools and help preserve the electives that would suffer with a smaller student body size at three middle school campuses. This would also put Da Vinci close enough to Davis High so that the Da Vinci students could take elective classes at Davis High. As a disclaimer, I live in East Davis and have children in the district currently. I realize this would be another change for East Davis but I would feel better about this change in configuration than I did about closing Valley Oak. I believe changing the middle school configurations would actually benefit the students unlike the needless displacement and destruction to needed programs that closing Valley Oak will do.
Why don’t we make Holmes the 9-12 Da Vinci High School and make Emerson and Harper 7-8 with about 675 students each? This would keep the enrollment up at the middle schools and help preserve the electives that would suffer with a smaller student body size at three middle school campuses. This would also put Da Vinci close enough to Davis High so that the Da Vinci students could take elective classes at Davis High. As a disclaimer, I live in East Davis and have children in the district currently. I realize this would be another change for East Davis but I would feel better about this change in configuration than I did about closing Valley Oak. I believe changing the middle school configurations would actually benefit the students unlike the needless displacement and destruction to needed programs that closing Valley Oak will do.
anonymous 9:27 said
“Why don’t we make Holmes the 9-12 Da Vinci High School and make Emerson and Harper 7-8 with about 675 students each?”
Let me state upfront that I am opposed to the closure of Emerson. I think it is a short sided fix that presents a lot of problems for neighborhood schools and doesn’t allow for any future development that might occur in Davis.
As for closing Holmes instead of Emerson, I can think of a couple of reasons this is a bad idea:
1) Emerson needs a substantial amount of facility repair where Holmes doesn’t.
2) The closure of Holmes will directly affect the same neighborhood currently being devastated by the closure of Valley Oak. Closing Holmes would pretty much state that the DJUSD is abandoning the central core of Davis for the periphery. Closing two schools in one area of town in such a short period of time would unfairly place a large part of the burden for the DJUSD fiscal crisis on one neighborhood.
3) Just starting this discussion effectively starts playing neighborhoods against one another again. We’ve already done that with the whole Valley Oak fiasco. Honestly folks, lets just not go there again.
anonymous 9:27 said
“Why don’t we make Holmes the 9-12 Da Vinci High School and make Emerson and Harper 7-8 with about 675 students each?”
Let me state upfront that I am opposed to the closure of Emerson. I think it is a short sided fix that presents a lot of problems for neighborhood schools and doesn’t allow for any future development that might occur in Davis.
As for closing Holmes instead of Emerson, I can think of a couple of reasons this is a bad idea:
1) Emerson needs a substantial amount of facility repair where Holmes doesn’t.
2) The closure of Holmes will directly affect the same neighborhood currently being devastated by the closure of Valley Oak. Closing Holmes would pretty much state that the DJUSD is abandoning the central core of Davis for the periphery. Closing two schools in one area of town in such a short period of time would unfairly place a large part of the burden for the DJUSD fiscal crisis on one neighborhood.
3) Just starting this discussion effectively starts playing neighborhoods against one another again. We’ve already done that with the whole Valley Oak fiasco. Honestly folks, lets just not go there again.
anonymous 9:27 said
“Why don’t we make Holmes the 9-12 Da Vinci High School and make Emerson and Harper 7-8 with about 675 students each?”
Let me state upfront that I am opposed to the closure of Emerson. I think it is a short sided fix that presents a lot of problems for neighborhood schools and doesn’t allow for any future development that might occur in Davis.
As for closing Holmes instead of Emerson, I can think of a couple of reasons this is a bad idea:
1) Emerson needs a substantial amount of facility repair where Holmes doesn’t.
2) The closure of Holmes will directly affect the same neighborhood currently being devastated by the closure of Valley Oak. Closing Holmes would pretty much state that the DJUSD is abandoning the central core of Davis for the periphery. Closing two schools in one area of town in such a short period of time would unfairly place a large part of the burden for the DJUSD fiscal crisis on one neighborhood.
3) Just starting this discussion effectively starts playing neighborhoods against one another again. We’ve already done that with the whole Valley Oak fiasco. Honestly folks, lets just not go there again.
anonymous 9:27 said
“Why don’t we make Holmes the 9-12 Da Vinci High School and make Emerson and Harper 7-8 with about 675 students each?”
Let me state upfront that I am opposed to the closure of Emerson. I think it is a short sided fix that presents a lot of problems for neighborhood schools and doesn’t allow for any future development that might occur in Davis.
As for closing Holmes instead of Emerson, I can think of a couple of reasons this is a bad idea:
1) Emerson needs a substantial amount of facility repair where Holmes doesn’t.
2) The closure of Holmes will directly affect the same neighborhood currently being devastated by the closure of Valley Oak. Closing Holmes would pretty much state that the DJUSD is abandoning the central core of Davis for the periphery. Closing two schools in one area of town in such a short period of time would unfairly place a large part of the burden for the DJUSD fiscal crisis on one neighborhood.
3) Just starting this discussion effectively starts playing neighborhoods against one another again. We’ve already done that with the whole Valley Oak fiasco. Honestly folks, lets just not go there again.
It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!! NOW… the board tries to be “creative” as they jump through hoops for the West Davis parents. Where was their “creativity” when they slammed the doors shut on Valley Oak?
well said.
the board screwed themselves by not confronting the real issue head on. instead they picked off a school that didn’t have enough parental muscle to defend itself.
Shame on the board for listening to their so-called experts on bonds who set us up for another round of cuts. All that money spent on beating up valley oak should have taken a look at the whole district.
Our previous boards were all too happy to bring home the pork and build new schools at the expense of the traditional neighborhood schools, nice.
It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!! NOW… the board tries to be “creative” as they jump through hoops for the West Davis parents. Where was their “creativity” when they slammed the doors shut on Valley Oak?
well said.
the board screwed themselves by not confronting the real issue head on. instead they picked off a school that didn’t have enough parental muscle to defend itself.
Shame on the board for listening to their so-called experts on bonds who set us up for another round of cuts. All that money spent on beating up valley oak should have taken a look at the whole district.
Our previous boards were all too happy to bring home the pork and build new schools at the expense of the traditional neighborhood schools, nice.
It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!! NOW… the board tries to be “creative” as they jump through hoops for the West Davis parents. Where was their “creativity” when they slammed the doors shut on Valley Oak?
well said.
the board screwed themselves by not confronting the real issue head on. instead they picked off a school that didn’t have enough parental muscle to defend itself.
Shame on the board for listening to their so-called experts on bonds who set us up for another round of cuts. All that money spent on beating up valley oak should have taken a look at the whole district.
Our previous boards were all too happy to bring home the pork and build new schools at the expense of the traditional neighborhood schools, nice.
It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!! NOW… the board tries to be “creative” as they jump through hoops for the West Davis parents. Where was their “creativity” when they slammed the doors shut on Valley Oak?
well said.
the board screwed themselves by not confronting the real issue head on. instead they picked off a school that didn’t have enough parental muscle to defend itself.
Shame on the board for listening to their so-called experts on bonds who set us up for another round of cuts. All that money spent on beating up valley oak should have taken a look at the whole district.
Our previous boards were all too happy to bring home the pork and build new schools at the expense of the traditional neighborhood schools, nice.
There is lots to think about here.
If we are going to grow another High School, why not Da Vinci at Harper where there there is land to expand and has the possibility in the future that it could be a fully functioning 2nd High school? Put all of the 7-8th graders at Holmes & Emerson? The Unitrans bus system could run up and down Covell so DaVinci students would not have to race through neighborhoods to get to classes at the High School and there is plenty of parking.
If it is temporary, I agree, why not Holmes instead? The configuration of Holmes may allow for a greater separation of the school grades, while Emerson’s configuration will have to allow more mixing of the grades. (Perhaps it is because that neighborhood just lost its elementary school and partially losing its junior high would be another blow.)
One thing to note – Los Rios Community College District is still planning on building a college campus in the UCD West Campus project. Emerson would be close enough for DaVinci students to travel to classes there.
What ever happened to the Best Uses Task Force? Why didn’t they look at all of this when they had a chance? What a waste of everyone’s time.
Why not just make the cuts in program with the existing configuration and then everyone can see what we would be giving up if we kept all the schools open.
We need more information!
There is lots to think about here.
If we are going to grow another High School, why not Da Vinci at Harper where there there is land to expand and has the possibility in the future that it could be a fully functioning 2nd High school? Put all of the 7-8th graders at Holmes & Emerson? The Unitrans bus system could run up and down Covell so DaVinci students would not have to race through neighborhoods to get to classes at the High School and there is plenty of parking.
If it is temporary, I agree, why not Holmes instead? The configuration of Holmes may allow for a greater separation of the school grades, while Emerson’s configuration will have to allow more mixing of the grades. (Perhaps it is because that neighborhood just lost its elementary school and partially losing its junior high would be another blow.)
One thing to note – Los Rios Community College District is still planning on building a college campus in the UCD West Campus project. Emerson would be close enough for DaVinci students to travel to classes there.
What ever happened to the Best Uses Task Force? Why didn’t they look at all of this when they had a chance? What a waste of everyone’s time.
Why not just make the cuts in program with the existing configuration and then everyone can see what we would be giving up if we kept all the schools open.
We need more information!
There is lots to think about here.
If we are going to grow another High School, why not Da Vinci at Harper where there there is land to expand and has the possibility in the future that it could be a fully functioning 2nd High school? Put all of the 7-8th graders at Holmes & Emerson? The Unitrans bus system could run up and down Covell so DaVinci students would not have to race through neighborhoods to get to classes at the High School and there is plenty of parking.
If it is temporary, I agree, why not Holmes instead? The configuration of Holmes may allow for a greater separation of the school grades, while Emerson’s configuration will have to allow more mixing of the grades. (Perhaps it is because that neighborhood just lost its elementary school and partially losing its junior high would be another blow.)
One thing to note – Los Rios Community College District is still planning on building a college campus in the UCD West Campus project. Emerson would be close enough for DaVinci students to travel to classes there.
What ever happened to the Best Uses Task Force? Why didn’t they look at all of this when they had a chance? What a waste of everyone’s time.
Why not just make the cuts in program with the existing configuration and then everyone can see what we would be giving up if we kept all the schools open.
We need more information!
There is lots to think about here.
If we are going to grow another High School, why not Da Vinci at Harper where there there is land to expand and has the possibility in the future that it could be a fully functioning 2nd High school? Put all of the 7-8th graders at Holmes & Emerson? The Unitrans bus system could run up and down Covell so DaVinci students would not have to race through neighborhoods to get to classes at the High School and there is plenty of parking.
If it is temporary, I agree, why not Holmes instead? The configuration of Holmes may allow for a greater separation of the school grades, while Emerson’s configuration will have to allow more mixing of the grades. (Perhaps it is because that neighborhood just lost its elementary school and partially losing its junior high would be another blow.)
One thing to note – Los Rios Community College District is still planning on building a college campus in the UCD West Campus project. Emerson would be close enough for DaVinci students to travel to classes there.
What ever happened to the Best Uses Task Force? Why didn’t they look at all of this when they had a chance? What a waste of everyone’s time.
Why not just make the cuts in program with the existing configuration and then everyone can see what we would be giving up if we kept all the schools open.
We need more information!
“well said.
the board screwed themselves by not confronting the real issue head on. instead they picked off a school that didn’t have enough parental muscle to defend itself.
Shame on the board for listening to their so-called experts on bonds who set us up for another round of cuts. All that money spent on beating up valley oak should have taken a look at the whole district.
Our previous boards were all too happy to bring home the pork and build new schools at the expense of the traditional neighborhood schools, nice.”
As an Emerson parent who actually used to live next to VO and appreciated the quality of program there, I don’t see this in quite the conspiratorial light, greed, or w/ collective lack of school board intelligence that is implied in the above comment.
They really have to make these cuts, and at this point it is beyond laying total blame on any one person or collective group.
The bigger context is that we as a society (state and nationally) simply do not value funding education the way most other affluent countries do. Taxing is viewed in the context of taking away an individual’s wealth rather than as a community investment. Because of that, we all end up being a little bit poorer in the end.
If there is someone so passionate about charter schools who would run for the school board, that would be a tremendously valuable perspective to be hearing at these meetings instead of being hidden the comments section of a blog.
“well said.
the board screwed themselves by not confronting the real issue head on. instead they picked off a school that didn’t have enough parental muscle to defend itself.
Shame on the board for listening to their so-called experts on bonds who set us up for another round of cuts. All that money spent on beating up valley oak should have taken a look at the whole district.
Our previous boards were all too happy to bring home the pork and build new schools at the expense of the traditional neighborhood schools, nice.”
As an Emerson parent who actually used to live next to VO and appreciated the quality of program there, I don’t see this in quite the conspiratorial light, greed, or w/ collective lack of school board intelligence that is implied in the above comment.
They really have to make these cuts, and at this point it is beyond laying total blame on any one person or collective group.
The bigger context is that we as a society (state and nationally) simply do not value funding education the way most other affluent countries do. Taxing is viewed in the context of taking away an individual’s wealth rather than as a community investment. Because of that, we all end up being a little bit poorer in the end.
If there is someone so passionate about charter schools who would run for the school board, that would be a tremendously valuable perspective to be hearing at these meetings instead of being hidden the comments section of a blog.
“well said.
the board screwed themselves by not confronting the real issue head on. instead they picked off a school that didn’t have enough parental muscle to defend itself.
Shame on the board for listening to their so-called experts on bonds who set us up for another round of cuts. All that money spent on beating up valley oak should have taken a look at the whole district.
Our previous boards were all too happy to bring home the pork and build new schools at the expense of the traditional neighborhood schools, nice.”
As an Emerson parent who actually used to live next to VO and appreciated the quality of program there, I don’t see this in quite the conspiratorial light, greed, or w/ collective lack of school board intelligence that is implied in the above comment.
They really have to make these cuts, and at this point it is beyond laying total blame on any one person or collective group.
The bigger context is that we as a society (state and nationally) simply do not value funding education the way most other affluent countries do. Taxing is viewed in the context of taking away an individual’s wealth rather than as a community investment. Because of that, we all end up being a little bit poorer in the end.
If there is someone so passionate about charter schools who would run for the school board, that would be a tremendously valuable perspective to be hearing at these meetings instead of being hidden the comments section of a blog.
“well said.
the board screwed themselves by not confronting the real issue head on. instead they picked off a school that didn’t have enough parental muscle to defend itself.
Shame on the board for listening to their so-called experts on bonds who set us up for another round of cuts. All that money spent on beating up valley oak should have taken a look at the whole district.
Our previous boards were all too happy to bring home the pork and build new schools at the expense of the traditional neighborhood schools, nice.”
As an Emerson parent who actually used to live next to VO and appreciated the quality of program there, I don’t see this in quite the conspiratorial light, greed, or w/ collective lack of school board intelligence that is implied in the above comment.
They really have to make these cuts, and at this point it is beyond laying total blame on any one person or collective group.
The bigger context is that we as a society (state and nationally) simply do not value funding education the way most other affluent countries do. Taxing is viewed in the context of taking away an individual’s wealth rather than as a community investment. Because of that, we all end up being a little bit poorer in the end.
If there is someone so passionate about charter schools who would run for the school board, that would be a tremendously valuable perspective to be hearing at these meetings instead of being hidden the comments section of a blog.
“It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!!”
Any new tax, including a parcel tax, has to be passed by a two-thirds majority in CA. That doesn’t sound like “taxation without representation” to me. In fact, if anything, you can end up with tyranny by the minority (up to 65% in favor but it still doesn’t pass).
“It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!!”
Any new tax, including a parcel tax, has to be passed by a two-thirds majority in CA. That doesn’t sound like “taxation without representation” to me. In fact, if anything, you can end up with tyranny by the minority (up to 65% in favor but it still doesn’t pass).
“It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!!”
Any new tax, including a parcel tax, has to be passed by a two-thirds majority in CA. That doesn’t sound like “taxation without representation” to me. In fact, if anything, you can end up with tyranny by the minority (up to 65% in favor but it still doesn’t pass).
“It will be a cold day in hell before I pay an additional parcel tax…talk about taxation without representation!!”
Any new tax, including a parcel tax, has to be passed by a two-thirds majority in CA. That doesn’t sound like “taxation without representation” to me. In fact, if anything, you can end up with tyranny by the minority (up to 65% in favor but it still doesn’t pass).
I will gladly donate (and already have) during financial crises such as the one Arnold has partially created. I don’t want a tax that will continue during good years for future boards to go on spending sprees as they have in the past. The La Jolla school district generated almost $3,000,000 in one night with a fundraising event with some parents donating $100,000. I believe Davis has the capacity to generate the funds needed voluntarily.
I will gladly donate (and already have) during financial crises such as the one Arnold has partially created. I don’t want a tax that will continue during good years for future boards to go on spending sprees as they have in the past. The La Jolla school district generated almost $3,000,000 in one night with a fundraising event with some parents donating $100,000. I believe Davis has the capacity to generate the funds needed voluntarily.
I will gladly donate (and already have) during financial crises such as the one Arnold has partially created. I don’t want a tax that will continue during good years for future boards to go on spending sprees as they have in the past. The La Jolla school district generated almost $3,000,000 in one night with a fundraising event with some parents donating $100,000. I believe Davis has the capacity to generate the funds needed voluntarily.
I will gladly donate (and already have) during financial crises such as the one Arnold has partially created. I don’t want a tax that will continue during good years for future boards to go on spending sprees as they have in the past. The La Jolla school district generated almost $3,000,000 in one night with a fundraising event with some parents donating $100,000. I believe Davis has the capacity to generate the funds needed voluntarily.
It seems odd that Emerson was going to be closed due to only an enrollment of 550, and now the enrollment at other JHs would be much lower than that number. Also, DaVinci students won’t be able to take classes at the HS.
Why not move NDE students to VO, and make the NDE campus the DaVinci site and HS overflow? It is right onsite, and would give much more flexibility for future decisions.
It seems odd that Emerson was going to be closed due to only an enrollment of 550, and now the enrollment at other JHs would be much lower than that number. Also, DaVinci students won’t be able to take classes at the HS.
Why not move NDE students to VO, and make the NDE campus the DaVinci site and HS overflow? It is right onsite, and would give much more flexibility for future decisions.
It seems odd that Emerson was going to be closed due to only an enrollment of 550, and now the enrollment at other JHs would be much lower than that number. Also, DaVinci students won’t be able to take classes at the HS.
Why not move NDE students to VO, and make the NDE campus the DaVinci site and HS overflow? It is right onsite, and would give much more flexibility for future decisions.
It seems odd that Emerson was going to be closed due to only an enrollment of 550, and now the enrollment at other JHs would be much lower than that number. Also, DaVinci students won’t be able to take classes at the HS.
Why not move NDE students to VO, and make the NDE campus the DaVinci site and HS overflow? It is right onsite, and would give much more flexibility for future decisions.
Move DaVinci to NDE. Move Cezar Chavez to Valley Oak. Move NDE kids to Cezar Chavez. Close Emerson. 7th & 8th stay at Harper & Holmes. Fix Emerson – rebuild or renovate. Open Emerson. Move 7 & 8th to Holmes & Emerson. Open 2nd High School at Harper. Move District Office to NDE. Sell Downtown property for development.
Now that’s a plan.
Move DaVinci to NDE. Move Cezar Chavez to Valley Oak. Move NDE kids to Cezar Chavez. Close Emerson. 7th & 8th stay at Harper & Holmes. Fix Emerson – rebuild or renovate. Open Emerson. Move 7 & 8th to Holmes & Emerson. Open 2nd High School at Harper. Move District Office to NDE. Sell Downtown property for development.
Now that’s a plan.
Move DaVinci to NDE. Move Cezar Chavez to Valley Oak. Move NDE kids to Cezar Chavez. Close Emerson. 7th & 8th stay at Harper & Holmes. Fix Emerson – rebuild or renovate. Open Emerson. Move 7 & 8th to Holmes & Emerson. Open 2nd High School at Harper. Move District Office to NDE. Sell Downtown property for development.
Now that’s a plan.
Move DaVinci to NDE. Move Cezar Chavez to Valley Oak. Move NDE kids to Cezar Chavez. Close Emerson. 7th & 8th stay at Harper & Holmes. Fix Emerson – rebuild or renovate. Open Emerson. Move 7 & 8th to Holmes & Emerson. Open 2nd High School at Harper. Move District Office to NDE. Sell Downtown property for development.
Now that’s a plan.
I’ve got it! said…
Move DaVinci to NDE. Move Cezar Chavez to Valley Oak. Move NDE kids to Cezar Chavez. Close Emerson. 7th & 8th stay at Harper & Holmes. Fix Emerson – rebuild or renovate. Open Emerson. Move 7 & 8th to Holmes & Emerson. Open 2nd High School at Harper. Move District Office to NDE. Sell Downtown property for development.
Now that’s a plan.
3/21/08 1:18 PM
I like it! How fast can we do it?
I’ve got it! said…
Move DaVinci to NDE. Move Cezar Chavez to Valley Oak. Move NDE kids to Cezar Chavez. Close Emerson. 7th & 8th stay at Harper & Holmes. Fix Emerson – rebuild or renovate. Open Emerson. Move 7 & 8th to Holmes & Emerson. Open 2nd High School at Harper. Move District Office to NDE. Sell Downtown property for development.
Now that’s a plan.
3/21/08 1:18 PM
I like it! How fast can we do it?
I’ve got it! said…
Move DaVinci to NDE. Move Cezar Chavez to Valley Oak. Move NDE kids to Cezar Chavez. Close Emerson. 7th & 8th stay at Harper & Holmes. Fix Emerson – rebuild or renovate. Open Emerson. Move 7 & 8th to Holmes & Emerson. Open 2nd High School at Harper. Move District Office to NDE. Sell Downtown property for development.
Now that’s a plan.
3/21/08 1:18 PM
I like it! How fast can we do it?
I’ve got it! said…
Move DaVinci to NDE. Move Cezar Chavez to Valley Oak. Move NDE kids to Cezar Chavez. Close Emerson. 7th & 8th stay at Harper & Holmes. Fix Emerson – rebuild or renovate. Open Emerson. Move 7 & 8th to Holmes & Emerson. Open 2nd High School at Harper. Move District Office to NDE. Sell Downtown property for development.
Now that’s a plan.
3/21/08 1:18 PM
I like it! How fast can we do it?
DPD — I did not hear a consensus of the Board saying they liked Option G. I heard a consensus that they did not like any of the options but felt they had to pick one. Then, in an effort to move things forward, there was a consensus to eliminate all options except Option G (with potential to move Da Vinci to VO site instead of Emerson), Option A (and Option E – status quo??), and a request to district staff to flesh out options A and G re costs, timing, programmatic effects, etc., after which the Board will look at these options again on March 31st and April 3rd. A number of Board members were skeptical that the financial numbers would really work out with Option G. I suspect that, upon reworking, it will become clear that Option G will not save enough general fund money to be worth the facilities fund cost, and would create programmatic problems worse than those it would solve.
DPD — I did not hear a consensus of the Board saying they liked Option G. I heard a consensus that they did not like any of the options but felt they had to pick one. Then, in an effort to move things forward, there was a consensus to eliminate all options except Option G (with potential to move Da Vinci to VO site instead of Emerson), Option A (and Option E – status quo??), and a request to district staff to flesh out options A and G re costs, timing, programmatic effects, etc., after which the Board will look at these options again on March 31st and April 3rd. A number of Board members were skeptical that the financial numbers would really work out with Option G. I suspect that, upon reworking, it will become clear that Option G will not save enough general fund money to be worth the facilities fund cost, and would create programmatic problems worse than those it would solve.
DPD — I did not hear a consensus of the Board saying they liked Option G. I heard a consensus that they did not like any of the options but felt they had to pick one. Then, in an effort to move things forward, there was a consensus to eliminate all options except Option G (with potential to move Da Vinci to VO site instead of Emerson), Option A (and Option E – status quo??), and a request to district staff to flesh out options A and G re costs, timing, programmatic effects, etc., after which the Board will look at these options again on March 31st and April 3rd. A number of Board members were skeptical that the financial numbers would really work out with Option G. I suspect that, upon reworking, it will become clear that Option G will not save enough general fund money to be worth the facilities fund cost, and would create programmatic problems worse than those it would solve.
DPD — I did not hear a consensus of the Board saying they liked Option G. I heard a consensus that they did not like any of the options but felt they had to pick one. Then, in an effort to move things forward, there was a consensus to eliminate all options except Option G (with potential to move Da Vinci to VO site instead of Emerson), Option A (and Option E – status quo??), and a request to district staff to flesh out options A and G re costs, timing, programmatic effects, etc., after which the Board will look at these options again on March 31st and April 3rd. A number of Board members were skeptical that the financial numbers would really work out with Option G. I suspect that, upon reworking, it will become clear that Option G will not save enough general fund money to be worth the facilities fund cost, and would create programmatic problems worse than those it would solve.
My my my…heroic efforts to save a West Davis school. That’s the difference between a neighborhood of owners, and one with a 60% rental rate.
In eighteen months the Best Uses etc..couldn’t spare a moment ot address the Emerson problem. Could it be that the board didn’t want to tell half of North Davis that they couldn’t drive their children to the new junior high and were districted for Emerson? (By the way, what’s North Davis’ rental rate?)
In anticipation of this large high school student population, Harper was built as a dual use campus with an eye to using it as a high school should DHS population exceed 1800. It was deemed 1600 was an “ideal” enrollemnt for DHS. Mace Ranch/ Lake Alhambra were up in arms at the thought of the noise and traffic that a high school brings coming through their neighborhood. They’ve already complained that class bells at Harper disturb them. (What is the rental rate out there to the Far East of us?)
It seems Davis school boards can only dish out “tough love” to the working class.
My my my…heroic efforts to save a West Davis school. That’s the difference between a neighborhood of owners, and one with a 60% rental rate.
In eighteen months the Best Uses etc..couldn’t spare a moment ot address the Emerson problem. Could it be that the board didn’t want to tell half of North Davis that they couldn’t drive their children to the new junior high and were districted for Emerson? (By the way, what’s North Davis’ rental rate?)
In anticipation of this large high school student population, Harper was built as a dual use campus with an eye to using it as a high school should DHS population exceed 1800. It was deemed 1600 was an “ideal” enrollemnt for DHS. Mace Ranch/ Lake Alhambra were up in arms at the thought of the noise and traffic that a high school brings coming through their neighborhood. They’ve already complained that class bells at Harper disturb them. (What is the rental rate out there to the Far East of us?)
It seems Davis school boards can only dish out “tough love” to the working class.
My my my…heroic efforts to save a West Davis school. That’s the difference between a neighborhood of owners, and one with a 60% rental rate.
In eighteen months the Best Uses etc..couldn’t spare a moment ot address the Emerson problem. Could it be that the board didn’t want to tell half of North Davis that they couldn’t drive their children to the new junior high and were districted for Emerson? (By the way, what’s North Davis’ rental rate?)
In anticipation of this large high school student population, Harper was built as a dual use campus with an eye to using it as a high school should DHS population exceed 1800. It was deemed 1600 was an “ideal” enrollemnt for DHS. Mace Ranch/ Lake Alhambra were up in arms at the thought of the noise and traffic that a high school brings coming through their neighborhood. They’ve already complained that class bells at Harper disturb them. (What is the rental rate out there to the Far East of us?)
It seems Davis school boards can only dish out “tough love” to the working class.
My my my…heroic efforts to save a West Davis school. That’s the difference between a neighborhood of owners, and one with a 60% rental rate.
In eighteen months the Best Uses etc..couldn’t spare a moment ot address the Emerson problem. Could it be that the board didn’t want to tell half of North Davis that they couldn’t drive their children to the new junior high and were districted for Emerson? (By the way, what’s North Davis’ rental rate?)
In anticipation of this large high school student population, Harper was built as a dual use campus with an eye to using it as a high school should DHS population exceed 1800. It was deemed 1600 was an “ideal” enrollemnt for DHS. Mace Ranch/ Lake Alhambra were up in arms at the thought of the noise and traffic that a high school brings coming through their neighborhood. They’ve already complained that class bells at Harper disturb them. (What is the rental rate out there to the Far East of us?)
It seems Davis school boards can only dish out “tough love” to the working class.
North Davis elementary actually has a huge amount of rental housing and low income housing. Just look to the North, and to the East.
North Davis elementary actually has a huge amount of rental housing and low income housing. Just look to the North, and to the East.
North Davis elementary actually has a huge amount of rental housing and low income housing. Just look to the North, and to the East.
North Davis elementary actually has a huge amount of rental housing and low income housing. Just look to the North, and to the East.
Also, North Davis attends Holmes, not Harper.
Also, North Davis attends Holmes, not Harper.
Also, North Davis attends Holmes, not Harper.
Also, North Davis attends Holmes, not Harper.
I have no idea about rental rates, but North Davis Elementary is a Title 1 school (based on students qualified for free and reduced lunches).
I have no idea about rental rates, but North Davis Elementary is a Title 1 school (based on students qualified for free and reduced lunches).
I have no idea about rental rates, but North Davis Elementary is a Title 1 school (based on students qualified for free and reduced lunches).
I have no idea about rental rates, but North Davis Elementary is a Title 1 school (based on students qualified for free and reduced lunches).
I also understand that Patwin went Title one a few years ago.
I also understand that Patwin went Title one a few years ago.
I also understand that Patwin went Title one a few years ago.
I also understand that Patwin went Title one a few years ago.
Good to see your board came to their senses.
Woodland’s “fantastic four” is soon going to face a recall regarding their new district office purchase.
It has been covered pretty much in Woodland’s two blogs, Woodland Journal and politiclast.
Good to see your board came to their senses.
Woodland’s “fantastic four” is soon going to face a recall regarding their new district office purchase.
It has been covered pretty much in Woodland’s two blogs, Woodland Journal and politiclast.
Good to see your board came to their senses.
Woodland’s “fantastic four” is soon going to face a recall regarding their new district office purchase.
It has been covered pretty much in Woodland’s two blogs, Woodland Journal and politiclast.
Good to see your board came to their senses.
Woodland’s “fantastic four” is soon going to face a recall regarding their new district office purchase.
It has been covered pretty much in Woodland’s two blogs, Woodland Journal and politiclast.
I have to chuckle at the consternation over a 9-12 configuration. A 9-12 pattern is the pre-dominant one in CA high schools. The Davis prectice of 10-12 has been largely discarded as an educational model. For years Davis has played a shell game to put off building a second high school by keeping 9th graders with 7th and 8th graders a combination that does not work as well as 9-12 for a variety of educational, social and psychological reasons. Time to move into the real world and do what’s best for kids.
I have to chuckle at the consternation over a 9-12 configuration. A 9-12 pattern is the pre-dominant one in CA high schools. The Davis prectice of 10-12 has been largely discarded as an educational model. For years Davis has played a shell game to put off building a second high school by keeping 9th graders with 7th and 8th graders a combination that does not work as well as 9-12 for a variety of educational, social and psychological reasons. Time to move into the real world and do what’s best for kids.
I have to chuckle at the consternation over a 9-12 configuration. A 9-12 pattern is the pre-dominant one in CA high schools. The Davis prectice of 10-12 has been largely discarded as an educational model. For years Davis has played a shell game to put off building a second high school by keeping 9th graders with 7th and 8th graders a combination that does not work as well as 9-12 for a variety of educational, social and psychological reasons. Time to move into the real world and do what’s best for kids.
I have to chuckle at the consternation over a 9-12 configuration. A 9-12 pattern is the pre-dominant one in CA high schools. The Davis prectice of 10-12 has been largely discarded as an educational model. For years Davis has played a shell game to put off building a second high school by keeping 9th graders with 7th and 8th graders a combination that does not work as well as 9-12 for a variety of educational, social and psychological reasons. Time to move into the real world and do what’s best for kids.
Funny, I haven’t seen a single comment with consternation over 9-12??? More worry over making a move to 9-12 so quickly. I think the bigger worry is over potentially having 7-12 over at Emerson.
Funny, I haven’t seen a single comment with consternation over 9-12??? More worry over making a move to 9-12 so quickly. I think the bigger worry is over potentially having 7-12 over at Emerson.
Funny, I haven’t seen a single comment with consternation over 9-12??? More worry over making a move to 9-12 so quickly. I think the bigger worry is over potentially having 7-12 over at Emerson.
Funny, I haven’t seen a single comment with consternation over 9-12??? More worry over making a move to 9-12 so quickly. I think the bigger worry is over potentially having 7-12 over at Emerson.
What’s most unfortunate about a ‘crisis’ is that it brings about fast decisions that are made without ample time to truly understand ALL the factors.
“Yes”, most high schools are 9-12. DHS is a rare exception with its 10-12 configuration, with 7-9 at the junior highs also being out of the norm.
But why isn’t anyone asking if Davis NEEDS to be in line with everyone else? Hasn’t our academic performance shown that what we have WORKS…and THEN some?
Has anyone wondered if 9th graders will be better served academically and socially by being in a larger and more crowded environment? So now the 9th graders become the ‘freshmen’ at a 4-year school, with the tremendous social and developmental gap between 14 and 18 year olds. Is this ‘better’ for them?
When my children went through the Davis schools, I liked that 9th grade was at the junior high. Rather than being the bottom rung of a high school, they were the student leaders at the junior high. This additional year gave them the opportunity to develop leadership skills and self-confidence that would not be available in the same way at a 4-year school.
I have listened to the arguments and merits of a 4-year configuration, and I understand the pros (and cons) of the various situations. I merely wonder where the DISCUSSION is on this.
I see a school board making their case for 9-12 (Richard Harris “I’m really excited about a 9-12” and Tim Taylor “The time has come..” – excuse me for paraphrasing them). Okay – their preferences are clear. Are they EDUCATORS though? Has anyone thought about discussing this with the JUNIOR HIGH STAFF or the HIGH SCHOOL STAFF? (my guess is that the junior highs would be resistant and the high school would be for it). Where is the PROFESSIONAL input from those MOST INVOLVED in this?
I have one more child coming up through the schools. I am already worried about her not having access to elementary music, science and libraries. Now I’m not even sure if there is a junior high for her to go to in our neighbord (Emerson district) and if she will be a 9th grader among 12th graders. If she is, I will have my ‘shotgun’ ready for any 12th grade boy who tries to date my baby!!!
What’s most unfortunate about a ‘crisis’ is that it brings about fast decisions that are made without ample time to truly understand ALL the factors.
“Yes”, most high schools are 9-12. DHS is a rare exception with its 10-12 configuration, with 7-9 at the junior highs also being out of the norm.
But why isn’t anyone asking if Davis NEEDS to be in line with everyone else? Hasn’t our academic performance shown that what we have WORKS…and THEN some?
Has anyone wondered if 9th graders will be better served academically and socially by being in a larger and more crowded environment? So now the 9th graders become the ‘freshmen’ at a 4-year school, with the tremendous social and developmental gap between 14 and 18 year olds. Is this ‘better’ for them?
When my children went through the Davis schools, I liked that 9th grade was at the junior high. Rather than being the bottom rung of a high school, they were the student leaders at the junior high. This additional year gave them the opportunity to develop leadership skills and self-confidence that would not be available in the same way at a 4-year school.
I have listened to the arguments and merits of a 4-year configuration, and I understand the pros (and cons) of the various situations. I merely wonder where the DISCUSSION is on this.
I see a school board making their case for 9-12 (Richard Harris “I’m really excited about a 9-12” and Tim Taylor “The time has come..” – excuse me for paraphrasing them). Okay – their preferences are clear. Are they EDUCATORS though? Has anyone thought about discussing this with the JUNIOR HIGH STAFF or the HIGH SCHOOL STAFF? (my guess is that the junior highs would be resistant and the high school would be for it). Where is the PROFESSIONAL input from those MOST INVOLVED in this?
I have one more child coming up through the schools. I am already worried about her not having access to elementary music, science and libraries. Now I’m not even sure if there is a junior high for her to go to in our neighbord (Emerson district) and if she will be a 9th grader among 12th graders. If she is, I will have my ‘shotgun’ ready for any 12th grade boy who tries to date my baby!!!
What’s most unfortunate about a ‘crisis’ is that it brings about fast decisions that are made without ample time to truly understand ALL the factors.
“Yes”, most high schools are 9-12. DHS is a rare exception with its 10-12 configuration, with 7-9 at the junior highs also being out of the norm.
But why isn’t anyone asking if Davis NEEDS to be in line with everyone else? Hasn’t our academic performance shown that what we have WORKS…and THEN some?
Has anyone wondered if 9th graders will be better served academically and socially by being in a larger and more crowded environment? So now the 9th graders become the ‘freshmen’ at a 4-year school, with the tremendous social and developmental gap between 14 and 18 year olds. Is this ‘better’ for them?
When my children went through the Davis schools, I liked that 9th grade was at the junior high. Rather than being the bottom rung of a high school, they were the student leaders at the junior high. This additional year gave them the opportunity to develop leadership skills and self-confidence that would not be available in the same way at a 4-year school.
I have listened to the arguments and merits of a 4-year configuration, and I understand the pros (and cons) of the various situations. I merely wonder where the DISCUSSION is on this.
I see a school board making their case for 9-12 (Richard Harris “I’m really excited about a 9-12” and Tim Taylor “The time has come..” – excuse me for paraphrasing them). Okay – their preferences are clear. Are they EDUCATORS though? Has anyone thought about discussing this with the JUNIOR HIGH STAFF or the HIGH SCHOOL STAFF? (my guess is that the junior highs would be resistant and the high school would be for it). Where is the PROFESSIONAL input from those MOST INVOLVED in this?
I have one more child coming up through the schools. I am already worried about her not having access to elementary music, science and libraries. Now I’m not even sure if there is a junior high for her to go to in our neighbord (Emerson district) and if she will be a 9th grader among 12th graders. If she is, I will have my ‘shotgun’ ready for any 12th grade boy who tries to date my baby!!!
What’s most unfortunate about a ‘crisis’ is that it brings about fast decisions that are made without ample time to truly understand ALL the factors.
“Yes”, most high schools are 9-12. DHS is a rare exception with its 10-12 configuration, with 7-9 at the junior highs also being out of the norm.
But why isn’t anyone asking if Davis NEEDS to be in line with everyone else? Hasn’t our academic performance shown that what we have WORKS…and THEN some?
Has anyone wondered if 9th graders will be better served academically and socially by being in a larger and more crowded environment? So now the 9th graders become the ‘freshmen’ at a 4-year school, with the tremendous social and developmental gap between 14 and 18 year olds. Is this ‘better’ for them?
When my children went through the Davis schools, I liked that 9th grade was at the junior high. Rather than being the bottom rung of a high school, they were the student leaders at the junior high. This additional year gave them the opportunity to develop leadership skills and self-confidence that would not be available in the same way at a 4-year school.
I have listened to the arguments and merits of a 4-year configuration, and I understand the pros (and cons) of the various situations. I merely wonder where the DISCUSSION is on this.
I see a school board making their case for 9-12 (Richard Harris “I’m really excited about a 9-12” and Tim Taylor “The time has come..” – excuse me for paraphrasing them). Okay – their preferences are clear. Are they EDUCATORS though? Has anyone thought about discussing this with the JUNIOR HIGH STAFF or the HIGH SCHOOL STAFF? (my guess is that the junior highs would be resistant and the high school would be for it). Where is the PROFESSIONAL input from those MOST INVOLVED in this?
I have one more child coming up through the schools. I am already worried about her not having access to elementary music, science and libraries. Now I’m not even sure if there is a junior high for her to go to in our neighbord (Emerson district) and if she will be a 9th grader among 12th graders. If she is, I will have my ‘shotgun’ ready for any 12th grade boy who tries to date my baby!!!
Where is the PROFESSIONAL input from those MOST INVOLVED in this?
Yeah, where’s total school solutions when you need them?
Where is the PROFESSIONAL input from those MOST INVOLVED in this?
Yeah, where’s total school solutions when you need them?
Where is the PROFESSIONAL input from those MOST INVOLVED in this?
Yeah, where’s total school solutions when you need them?
Where is the PROFESSIONAL input from those MOST INVOLVED in this?
Yeah, where’s total school solutions when you need them?
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions. Remarks like the one above are unnecessary and not even on the mark. If you read the original post, the writer was talking about the need for teacher inpu, which I agree with.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions. Remarks like the one above are unnecessary and not even on the mark. If you read the original post, the writer was talking about the need for teacher inpu, which I agree with.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions. Remarks like the one above are unnecessary and not even on the mark. If you read the original post, the writer was talking about the need for teacher inpu, which I agree with.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions. Remarks like the one above are unnecessary and not even on the mark. If you read the original post, the writer was talking about the need for teacher inpu, which I agree with.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions. Remarks like the one above are unnecessary and not even on the mark. If you read the original post, the writer was talking about the need for teacher input, which I agree with.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions. Remarks like the one above are unnecessary and not even on the mark. If you read the original post, the writer was talking about the need for teacher input, which I agree with.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions. Remarks like the one above are unnecessary and not even on the mark. If you read the original post, the writer was talking about the need for teacher input, which I agree with.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions. Remarks like the one above are unnecessary and not even on the mark. If you read the original post, the writer was talking about the need for teacher input, which I agree with.
It would be interesting to have all of the district’s teachers come together and propose a suggested solution to the situation. It is impossible to pass a tax increase before the budget is due. So cuts have to be made. Maybe the teachers as a group, not just the DTA hacks, would find the least bad idea.
It would be interesting to have all of the district’s teachers come together and propose a suggested solution to the situation. It is impossible to pass a tax increase before the budget is due. So cuts have to be made. Maybe the teachers as a group, not just the DTA hacks, would find the least bad idea.
It would be interesting to have all of the district’s teachers come together and propose a suggested solution to the situation. It is impossible to pass a tax increase before the budget is due. So cuts have to be made. Maybe the teachers as a group, not just the DTA hacks, would find the least bad idea.
It would be interesting to have all of the district’s teachers come together and propose a suggested solution to the situation. It is impossible to pass a tax increase before the budget is due. So cuts have to be made. Maybe the teachers as a group, not just the DTA hacks, would find the least bad idea.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions.
The comment before the above was meant to be a joke. Most people got it. Lighten up.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions.
The comment before the above was meant to be a joke. Most people got it. Lighten up.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions.
The comment before the above was meant to be a joke. Most people got it. Lighten up.
PROFESSIONAL INPUT would be the teaching staffs, not Total Solutions.
The comment before the above was meant to be a joke. Most people got it. Lighten up.
Let’s face it – the current School Board is crisis managing, and very badly. The community came out in force to demonstrate that closing Emerson is not a good option. However, if not Emerson, then where is the money to come from? What I see is a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions, but more than willing to take community money (Davis School Foundation). What are they afraid of – that the community may come up with a better idea? Or that the community will learn too much about what has been going on fiscally? I wonder…
Let’s face it – the current School Board is crisis managing, and very badly. The community came out in force to demonstrate that closing Emerson is not a good option. However, if not Emerson, then where is the money to come from? What I see is a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions, but more than willing to take community money (Davis School Foundation). What are they afraid of – that the community may come up with a better idea? Or that the community will learn too much about what has been going on fiscally? I wonder…
Let’s face it – the current School Board is crisis managing, and very badly. The community came out in force to demonstrate that closing Emerson is not a good option. However, if not Emerson, then where is the money to come from? What I see is a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions, but more than willing to take community money (Davis School Foundation). What are they afraid of – that the community may come up with a better idea? Or that the community will learn too much about what has been going on fiscally? I wonder…
Let’s face it – the current School Board is crisis managing, and very badly. The community came out in force to demonstrate that closing Emerson is not a good option. However, if not Emerson, then where is the money to come from? What I see is a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions, but more than willing to take community money (Davis School Foundation). What are they afraid of – that the community may come up with a better idea? Or that the community will learn too much about what has been going on fiscally? I wonder…
Regarding input from the teachers:
The teachers at Holmes were givenn a mere 15 minutes the day before the board meeting to revue, discuss, and select which plan to go for. Naturally, the teachers were unable to get through hardly any of them with real consideration. Then to add further insult, Pam Mari (I believe it was her but I’m not positive) told the board that the teachers were all for it!
Give me a break.
Regarding input from the teachers:
The teachers at Holmes were givenn a mere 15 minutes the day before the board meeting to revue, discuss, and select which plan to go for. Naturally, the teachers were unable to get through hardly any of them with real consideration. Then to add further insult, Pam Mari (I believe it was her but I’m not positive) told the board that the teachers were all for it!
Give me a break.
Regarding input from the teachers:
The teachers at Holmes were givenn a mere 15 minutes the day before the board meeting to revue, discuss, and select which plan to go for. Naturally, the teachers were unable to get through hardly any of them with real consideration. Then to add further insult, Pam Mari (I believe it was her but I’m not positive) told the board that the teachers were all for it!
Give me a break.
Regarding input from the teachers:
The teachers at Holmes were givenn a mere 15 minutes the day before the board meeting to revue, discuss, and select which plan to go for. Naturally, the teachers were unable to get through hardly any of them with real consideration. Then to add further insult, Pam Mari (I believe it was her but I’m not positive) told the board that the teachers were all for it!
Give me a break.
Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!
Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!
Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!
Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!
“Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!”
Sorry, but the decision to close Emerson was made in less than a month, without meaningful public input. It is nothing but a “quick fix” for the school district, to cover fiscal mismanagement.
“Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!”
Sorry, but the decision to close Emerson was made in less than a month, without meaningful public input. It is nothing but a “quick fix” for the school district, to cover fiscal mismanagement.
“Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!”
Sorry, but the decision to close Emerson was made in less than a month, without meaningful public input. It is nothing but a “quick fix” for the school district, to cover fiscal mismanagement.
“Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!”
Sorry, but the decision to close Emerson was made in less than a month, without meaningful public input. It is nothing but a “quick fix” for the school district, to cover fiscal mismanagement.
Wondering: they have not decided to close Emerson! Discussion continues, including a public meeting at Emerson on March 31st. You’re ahead of yourself…
Wondering: they have not decided to close Emerson! Discussion continues, including a public meeting at Emerson on March 31st. You’re ahead of yourself…
Wondering: they have not decided to close Emerson! Discussion continues, including a public meeting at Emerson on March 31st. You’re ahead of yourself…
Wondering: they have not decided to close Emerson! Discussion continues, including a public meeting at Emerson on March 31st. You’re ahead of yourself…
“Involved parent said…
Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!”
I appreciate that, but another take on it is what seems like very limited public contact and interaction. Now all I get is one minute of public comment at school board meetings which gives me just enough time to clear my throat and say three words.
Can’t we have some public forum in which we can interact verbally (and respectfully) w/ district staff and school board members but w/o so much formality and restraint of the school board meetings?
I don’t know what Monday’s meeting will be like, but I sure hope it’s not another school board meeting w/ one minute public comment!
“Involved parent said…
Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!”
I appreciate that, but another take on it is what seems like very limited public contact and interaction. Now all I get is one minute of public comment at school board meetings which gives me just enough time to clear my throat and say three words.
Can’t we have some public forum in which we can interact verbally (and respectfully) w/ district staff and school board members but w/o so much formality and restraint of the school board meetings?
I don’t know what Monday’s meeting will be like, but I sure hope it’s not another school board meeting w/ one minute public comment!
“Involved parent said…
Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!”
I appreciate that, but another take on it is what seems like very limited public contact and interaction. Now all I get is one minute of public comment at school board meetings which gives me just enough time to clear my throat and say three words.
Can’t we have some public forum in which we can interact verbally (and respectfully) w/ district staff and school board members but w/o so much formality and restraint of the school board meetings?
I don’t know what Monday’s meeting will be like, but I sure hope it’s not another school board meeting w/ one minute public comment!
“Involved parent said…
Wondering said “a school district/board/supt. who are unwilling to ask for community suggestions..” Are you kidding? The district begs people to comment and make suggestions!! There is even a budget input form and dedicated email address on the district website. The comments are read and provided to staff and board. Offer your input!!”
I appreciate that, but another take on it is what seems like very limited public contact and interaction. Now all I get is one minute of public comment at school board meetings which gives me just enough time to clear my throat and say three words.
Can’t we have some public forum in which we can interact verbally (and respectfully) w/ district staff and school board members but w/o so much formality and restraint of the school board meetings?
I don’t know what Monday’s meeting will be like, but I sure hope it’s not another school board meeting w/ one minute public comment!