First they argue, “the petition does not contain the number of signatures required by law.” This is perplexing at first given that they acquired over 200 signatures but were only required to get a 150.
What the district is claiming here is:
“The petitions submitted fail to affirm that the Charter was attached to the petition at the time of execution of the petition by the signatory as required by Education Code section 47605(a)(3).”
Likewise the second reason:
“The Charter does not contain an affirmation that the charter school shall be nonsectarian in its programs, employment practices, and all other operations, and not discriminate against any pupil on the basis of sexual orientation.”
On page 53 of the charter they appear cover most of that:
“There shall be no admission criteria, testing, or other evaluation required of any applicant. Valley Oak Charter School shall not charge an application fee nor shall it charge tuition. Valley Oak Charter School shall be nonsectarian in its admission and enrollment policies and shall not discriminate against any student on the basis of ethnicity, national origin, gender, or disability.”
Although they do not appear to cover sexual orientation of (elementary school) children in it. This would again appear to be something that could be amended rather easily and certainly should not be a cause for rejection.
The third section would appear to be most serious laying out 16 points suggesting that the “petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive descriptions of all of the elements prescribed by law.”
Even these sixteen points also appear at times to be subjective and nitpicky.
A link to the charter school section of California Education Code Appears here.
The resolution can be found here.
Jeff Hudson reporting for the Davis Enterprise spoke to Ginni Davis, associate superintendent for educational services:
“‘the district staff has experience and are very willing to consider a charter process and petition based on sound educational practices that would offer students an innovative option not already provided by the district, which is the spirit of the reason for charters to be formed.’
She added, ‘We are only allowed to respond to the charter petition as written and submitted at this time.’
‘We understand the emotional impact of consolidating Valley Oak Elementary to Korematsu Elementary has been difficult for the Valley Oak families,’ Davis added. ‘The district is open to working with the charter group in the future if the school board determines that we should go in that direction.’
Davis also referenced the rapid timeline for discussion. Supporters of the proposed Valley Oak Charter turned in their petition (with the signatures of the parents of 201 children, and 19 teachers) on Nov. 5. Under state law, the Davis school district then had 30 days to hold a public hearing about the charter petition, and 60 days (until Jan. 4 in this case) to either approve or deny the charter petition.
The Davis school board held the required public hearing Nov. 15 (10 days after the petition was filed) and could vote on the charter petition as early as Thursday (31 days after the petition was filed).
‘This fast timeline has not given us the opportunity to work more collaboratively to align interests and concerns,’ Davis said.
Describing the legal opinion expected to be released Monday, Davis said ‘our attorney is completing his analysis, with input from staff, to address more specifically each concern and legal issue’ raised by the proposed resolution on the school board agenda.”
Supporters of the Valley Oak Charter take exception to some of these comments.
Bill Storm, science teacher at Valley Oak and one of the drafters of the petition told the Vanguard yesterday:
“Considering that the organizers will not have the opportunity to meet until tomorrow evening to discuss events surrounding the charter, it would be inappropriate for me to respond substantively. Obviously, we’re disappointed that the staff should take such a position, but it is anything but a surprise given the tactics we’ve been seeing from district staff since before the November 15 hearing designed to suppress our progress. If there had ever been any concern regarding the delivery of services to students, the staff has had ample opportunity to weigh in on any issues whatsoever, particularly since last July, and there has been no such interest. The staff’s drafting of a resolution seems to give their recommendation the appearance of inevitability, and it is anything but that. The district’s goal has been, from the start, to close Valley Oak in order to open another school in a preferred neighborhood, and no one should be surprised that their agenda has not changed.”
Don Winters, a Davis High School teacher and a Valley Oak proponent was equally outspoken:
“It is not surprising to even the casual observer of the process taken by DJUSD officials to close Valley Oak School that the district administration would take the position it did to recommend denial of the charter to the board of education. What we have in this community in a nutshell… are school leaders who proceed to build a new elementary school when one is not needed, promote a fiscal emergency where one does not exist, and select a school for closure based on the least amount of “push-back” from the impacted community. “
He continued:
“Now we have a district leadership who will spend tens of thousands of our tax dollars to hire legal experts to give the “fine tooth comb approach” to a charter school proposal which could provide a quality education for the young people in core area of town as well as the greater community. “
As others have suggested, each of the points in the resolution is qualified under the guise of not “reasonably comprehensive.” Most of the points are actually covered to some degree or another, and therefore “reasonably comprehensive” has become a subjective argument posed by the school district. Ginni Davis has suggested that the school district would be supportive of the charter, however, Bill Storm’s statement indicates that they had ample opportunity to have such involvement over the past six months and opted to not participate. This would suggest that this was not foisted on them at the last moment as Ms. Davis describes. Most of these points appear to be correctable in a simple and rapid manner if it is the District’s true interest to negotiation rather than to kill this effort.
At this point, I think the most telling statement is that the staff drafted a resolution opposing the charter rather than a staff report that the board itself could take up, respond to, question, and then pick their own direction. To me this again suggests that the district staff is bent on killing this effort, demoralizing the petitioners, and hoping that this resolution goes away.
Furthermore, there would seem to be a strategic nature to this effort. By waiting until after this meeting, Board President Jim Provenza, the strongest proponent of Valley Oak on the board along with Sheila Allen would be off the board (along with Keltie Jones a strong opponent of Valley Oak) and they would be replaced by two board members who are more likely to be critics of the charter school proposal.
We shall see how this works out at the Thursday meeting, but at this point, I continue to remain deeply skeptical of district staff and their intentions on this.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Getting the 200 signatures should be a snap as the signer’s contact information is already in hand. Put out a call for help in gathering these signatures again and I(along with many others) will be there. The sexual orientation (for elementary school kids?) statement can be added with the stroke of a pen. The denial because it fails the “spirit” of the charter school principle(was chapter and verse of the charter school legislation referenced?) will be overturned on appeal. For those who think that our school system will continue to keep our home values high, think again as this DJUSD recommendation is yet another “black eye” for the Davis school administration.
Getting the 200 signatures should be a snap as the signer’s contact information is already in hand. Put out a call for help in gathering these signatures again and I(along with many others) will be there. The sexual orientation (for elementary school kids?) statement can be added with the stroke of a pen. The denial because it fails the “spirit” of the charter school principle(was chapter and verse of the charter school legislation referenced?) will be overturned on appeal. For those who think that our school system will continue to keep our home values high, think again as this DJUSD recommendation is yet another “black eye” for the Davis school administration.
Getting the 200 signatures should be a snap as the signer’s contact information is already in hand. Put out a call for help in gathering these signatures again and I(along with many others) will be there. The sexual orientation (for elementary school kids?) statement can be added with the stroke of a pen. The denial because it fails the “spirit” of the charter school principle(was chapter and verse of the charter school legislation referenced?) will be overturned on appeal. For those who think that our school system will continue to keep our home values high, think again as this DJUSD recommendation is yet another “black eye” for the Davis school administration.
Getting the 200 signatures should be a snap as the signer’s contact information is already in hand. Put out a call for help in gathering these signatures again and I(along with many others) will be there. The sexual orientation (for elementary school kids?) statement can be added with the stroke of a pen. The denial because it fails the “spirit” of the charter school principle(was chapter and verse of the charter school legislation referenced?) will be overturned on appeal. For those who think that our school system will continue to keep our home values high, think again as this DJUSD recommendation is yet another “black eye” for the Davis school administration.
I would appreciate an analysis of the politics of the situation. Although it would not be strictly factual, I would like to read something that might give me a better understanding of the district’s motivations. If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is – is there a loss of power or revenue with the introduction of a charter into the community? Is it seen as a rejection of the past preactices either surrounding the closer of Valley Oak or more broadly? Is it seen as a slippery slope in terms of other possible charters in the district? Is it a case of it can’t be good if we don’t do it? Is there a problem with enrollment figures at other schools as a result? Any information would be useful.
What is wrong with our district! Is it me our is everything falling apart? I don’t recall a time since the late 80’s that we’ve been so inept. Let’s support all our community members and back this charter school!
I would appreciate an analysis of the politics of the situation. Although it would not be strictly factual, I would like to read something that might give me a better understanding of the district’s motivations. If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is – is there a loss of power or revenue with the introduction of a charter into the community? Is it seen as a rejection of the past preactices either surrounding the closer of Valley Oak or more broadly? Is it seen as a slippery slope in terms of other possible charters in the district? Is it a case of it can’t be good if we don’t do it? Is there a problem with enrollment figures at other schools as a result? Any information would be useful.
What is wrong with our district! Is it me our is everything falling apart? I don’t recall a time since the late 80’s that we’ve been so inept. Let’s support all our community members and back this charter school!
I would appreciate an analysis of the politics of the situation. Although it would not be strictly factual, I would like to read something that might give me a better understanding of the district’s motivations. If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is – is there a loss of power or revenue with the introduction of a charter into the community? Is it seen as a rejection of the past preactices either surrounding the closer of Valley Oak or more broadly? Is it seen as a slippery slope in terms of other possible charters in the district? Is it a case of it can’t be good if we don’t do it? Is there a problem with enrollment figures at other schools as a result? Any information would be useful.
What is wrong with our district! Is it me our is everything falling apart? I don’t recall a time since the late 80’s that we’ve been so inept. Let’s support all our community members and back this charter school!
I would appreciate an analysis of the politics of the situation. Although it would not be strictly factual, I would like to read something that might give me a better understanding of the district’s motivations. If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is – is there a loss of power or revenue with the introduction of a charter into the community? Is it seen as a rejection of the past preactices either surrounding the closer of Valley Oak or more broadly? Is it seen as a slippery slope in terms of other possible charters in the district? Is it a case of it can’t be good if we don’t do it? Is there a problem with enrollment figures at other schools as a result? Any information would be useful.
What is wrong with our district! Is it me our is everything falling apart? I don’t recall a time since the late 80’s that we’ve been so inept. Let’s support all our community members and back this charter school!
I think it is a budgetary issue, I think they believed originally that Valley Oak was the easiest target and I think they still believe that they can break the will of the parents and teachers there.
I think it is a budgetary issue, I think they believed originally that Valley Oak was the easiest target and I think they still believe that they can break the will of the parents and teachers there.
I think it is a budgetary issue, I think they believed originally that Valley Oak was the easiest target and I think they still believe that they can break the will of the parents and teachers there.
I think it is a budgetary issue, I think they believed originally that Valley Oak was the easiest target and I think they still believe that they can break the will of the parents and teachers there.
Deja-view all over again…In a few years, watch the DJUSD take credit for starting the very successful and innovative Valley Oak Elementary Charter School.
Deja-view all over again…In a few years, watch the DJUSD take credit for starting the very successful and innovative Valley Oak Elementary Charter School.
Deja-view all over again…In a few years, watch the DJUSD take credit for starting the very successful and innovative Valley Oak Elementary Charter School.
Deja-view all over again…In a few years, watch the DJUSD take credit for starting the very successful and innovative Valley Oak Elementary Charter School.
“If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is -“
Intenched bureaucracies reflexly resist loss of power and control when their decisions are challenged and their competence is questioned. Change also requires fresh thinking and new plans,i.e..more work.
“If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is -“
Intenched bureaucracies reflexly resist loss of power and control when their decisions are challenged and their competence is questioned. Change also requires fresh thinking and new plans,i.e..more work.
“If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is -“
Intenched bureaucracies reflexly resist loss of power and control when their decisions are challenged and their competence is questioned. Change also requires fresh thinking and new plans,i.e..more work.
“If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is -“
Intenched bureaucracies reflexly resist loss of power and control when their decisions are challenged and their competence is questioned. Change also requires fresh thinking and new plans,i.e..more work.
Subtext: The firing of Murphy which left the rest of the District administration in place was bound to have some serious blow-back. District staff appear to have assumed an openly passive-aggressive posture to to the rejection of their leader and challenges to their authority.
Subtext: The firing of Murphy which left the rest of the District administration in place was bound to have some serious blow-back. District staff appear to have assumed an openly passive-aggressive posture to to the rejection of their leader and challenges to their authority.
Subtext: The firing of Murphy which left the rest of the District administration in place was bound to have some serious blow-back. District staff appear to have assumed an openly passive-aggressive posture to to the rejection of their leader and challenges to their authority.
Subtext: The firing of Murphy which left the rest of the District administration in place was bound to have some serious blow-back. District staff appear to have assumed an openly passive-aggressive posture to to the rejection of their leader and challenges to their authority.
working through the legits and details is hopefully what this is all about.
but no doubt, a charter school is not in the “best interest” of the majority vote of the school board memebers so being cautious or suspicious would seem very appropriate.
working through the legits and details is hopefully what this is all about.
but no doubt, a charter school is not in the “best interest” of the majority vote of the school board memebers so being cautious or suspicious would seem very appropriate.
working through the legits and details is hopefully what this is all about.
but no doubt, a charter school is not in the “best interest” of the majority vote of the school board memebers so being cautious or suspicious would seem very appropriate.
working through the legits and details is hopefully what this is all about.
but no doubt, a charter school is not in the “best interest” of the majority vote of the school board memebers so being cautious or suspicious would seem very appropriate.
The following is from the agenda for the 12/6 meeting:
“Staff is interested in talking further with the Charter group to share the district’s analysis of the current proposal and to discuss possible revisions to the proposal that would be mutually agreeable. To open a Charter School for the 08-09 school year, both parties would need to expeditiously arrange meeting dates and times so that a revised petition can be presented to the Board.
The Board of Trustees, once discussion has been held on the merits of the proposed charter, may vote to accept the petition, to deny the petition or to take no action on the petition at this time.”
The outgoing board can kick the can down the road for the newcomers if it so chooses. The staff report has given them the basis for a ‘no action at this time’ vote. Given the tensions between VO petitioners and staff, any meeting to ‘discuss possible revisions’ might be a little tense. But there is nothing in the staff report that could not be addressed if the will is there to come to agreement.
The following is from the agenda for the 12/6 meeting:
“Staff is interested in talking further with the Charter group to share the district’s analysis of the current proposal and to discuss possible revisions to the proposal that would be mutually agreeable. To open a Charter School for the 08-09 school year, both parties would need to expeditiously arrange meeting dates and times so that a revised petition can be presented to the Board.
The Board of Trustees, once discussion has been held on the merits of the proposed charter, may vote to accept the petition, to deny the petition or to take no action on the petition at this time.”
The outgoing board can kick the can down the road for the newcomers if it so chooses. The staff report has given them the basis for a ‘no action at this time’ vote. Given the tensions between VO petitioners and staff, any meeting to ‘discuss possible revisions’ might be a little tense. But there is nothing in the staff report that could not be addressed if the will is there to come to agreement.
The following is from the agenda for the 12/6 meeting:
“Staff is interested in talking further with the Charter group to share the district’s analysis of the current proposal and to discuss possible revisions to the proposal that would be mutually agreeable. To open a Charter School for the 08-09 school year, both parties would need to expeditiously arrange meeting dates and times so that a revised petition can be presented to the Board.
The Board of Trustees, once discussion has been held on the merits of the proposed charter, may vote to accept the petition, to deny the petition or to take no action on the petition at this time.”
The outgoing board can kick the can down the road for the newcomers if it so chooses. The staff report has given them the basis for a ‘no action at this time’ vote. Given the tensions between VO petitioners and staff, any meeting to ‘discuss possible revisions’ might be a little tense. But there is nothing in the staff report that could not be addressed if the will is there to come to agreement.
The following is from the agenda for the 12/6 meeting:
“Staff is interested in talking further with the Charter group to share the district’s analysis of the current proposal and to discuss possible revisions to the proposal that would be mutually agreeable. To open a Charter School for the 08-09 school year, both parties would need to expeditiously arrange meeting dates and times so that a revised petition can be presented to the Board.
The Board of Trustees, once discussion has been held on the merits of the proposed charter, may vote to accept the petition, to deny the petition or to take no action on the petition at this time.”
The outgoing board can kick the can down the road for the newcomers if it so chooses. The staff report has given them the basis for a ‘no action at this time’ vote. Given the tensions between VO petitioners and staff, any meeting to ‘discuss possible revisions’ might be a little tense. But there is nothing in the staff report that could not be addressed if the will is there to come to agreement.
As I said to my mate when we saw the headline in the Enterprise…”District Staff Drafts Reolution Against… Shouldn’t that read Soul-less Tools Draft Resolution…”????
As I said to my mate when we saw the headline in the Enterprise…”District Staff Drafts Reolution Against… Shouldn’t that read Soul-less Tools Draft Resolution…”????
As I said to my mate when we saw the headline in the Enterprise…”District Staff Drafts Reolution Against… Shouldn’t that read Soul-less Tools Draft Resolution…”????
As I said to my mate when we saw the headline in the Enterprise…”District Staff Drafts Reolution Against… Shouldn’t that read Soul-less Tools Draft Resolution…”????
“But there is nothing in the staff report that could not be addressed if the will is there to come to agreement.”
Don.. The issues are two technical ones that can easily be remedied and a third where the District essentially is claiming that the whole program fails the “spirit” of the Charter School concept. What is there to come to an agreement about?
“But there is nothing in the staff report that could not be addressed if the will is there to come to agreement.”
Don.. The issues are two technical ones that can easily be remedied and a third where the District essentially is claiming that the whole program fails the “spirit” of the Charter School concept. What is there to come to an agreement about?
“But there is nothing in the staff report that could not be addressed if the will is there to come to agreement.”
Don.. The issues are two technical ones that can easily be remedied and a third where the District essentially is claiming that the whole program fails the “spirit” of the Charter School concept. What is there to come to an agreement about?
“But there is nothing in the staff report that could not be addressed if the will is there to come to agreement.”
Don.. The issues are two technical ones that can easily be remedied and a third where the District essentially is claiming that the whole program fails the “spirit” of the Charter School concept. What is there to come to an agreement about?
What is there to come to an agreement about?
That would be a good question to ask the district staff at the meeting they have proposed. They describe “possible revisions…that would be mutually agreeable.” Presumably they have something in mind. I’m sure a meeting can be arranged in which their possible revisions can be explored. I wonder if any time is available for such a meeting before Thursday evening?
The other stuff is just rhetoric. I don’t think it is the staff’s job to interpret the spirit of the charter school concept, not is it one of the specific criteria upon which the board can act.
What is there to come to an agreement about?
That would be a good question to ask the district staff at the meeting they have proposed. They describe “possible revisions…that would be mutually agreeable.” Presumably they have something in mind. I’m sure a meeting can be arranged in which their possible revisions can be explored. I wonder if any time is available for such a meeting before Thursday evening?
The other stuff is just rhetoric. I don’t think it is the staff’s job to interpret the spirit of the charter school concept, not is it one of the specific criteria upon which the board can act.
What is there to come to an agreement about?
That would be a good question to ask the district staff at the meeting they have proposed. They describe “possible revisions…that would be mutually agreeable.” Presumably they have something in mind. I’m sure a meeting can be arranged in which their possible revisions can be explored. I wonder if any time is available for such a meeting before Thursday evening?
The other stuff is just rhetoric. I don’t think it is the staff’s job to interpret the spirit of the charter school concept, not is it one of the specific criteria upon which the board can act.
What is there to come to an agreement about?
That would be a good question to ask the district staff at the meeting they have proposed. They describe “possible revisions…that would be mutually agreeable.” Presumably they have something in mind. I’m sure a meeting can be arranged in which their possible revisions can be explored. I wonder if any time is available for such a meeting before Thursday evening?
The other stuff is just rhetoric. I don’t think it is the staff’s job to interpret the spirit of the charter school concept, not is it one of the specific criteria upon which the board can act.
DON WINTERS: “What we have in this community in a nutshell… are school leaders who proceed to build a new elementary school when one is not needed, promote a fiscal emergency where one does not exist, and select a school for closure based on the least amount of ‘push-back’ from the impacted community.”
What Don Winters says above is not entirely correct. When Korematsu was planned and construction began, the District believed that there was a need for a new K-6 school, given the number of children in Davis in that age group. By the time Korematsu was completed, however, the District realized that the assumptions about the K-6 student population were wrong. And that was then compounded by the citizens’ rejection of Measure X.
People make mistakes. It’s not fair to assume that they made those mistakes with malicious intent.
D. GREENWALD: “To me this again suggests that the district staff is bent on killing this effort, demoralizing the petitioners, and hoping that this resolution goes away.”
I don’t see how anyone could conclude otherwise. But ultimately, the elected school board members will have to make this decision. From what knowledgable people have said on this blog, the approval or rejection of a charter petition is ultimately a mechanical exercise. That is, does the charter proposal meet these X criteria or not? If the VO charter meets them, then it will have to be approved. If it does not, because of a few minor details, then a simple amendment can be made and the process will move forward.
DON WINTERS: “What we have in this community in a nutshell… are school leaders who proceed to build a new elementary school when one is not needed, promote a fiscal emergency where one does not exist, and select a school for closure based on the least amount of ‘push-back’ from the impacted community.”
What Don Winters says above is not entirely correct. When Korematsu was planned and construction began, the District believed that there was a need for a new K-6 school, given the number of children in Davis in that age group. By the time Korematsu was completed, however, the District realized that the assumptions about the K-6 student population were wrong. And that was then compounded by the citizens’ rejection of Measure X.
People make mistakes. It’s not fair to assume that they made those mistakes with malicious intent.
D. GREENWALD: “To me this again suggests that the district staff is bent on killing this effort, demoralizing the petitioners, and hoping that this resolution goes away.”
I don’t see how anyone could conclude otherwise. But ultimately, the elected school board members will have to make this decision. From what knowledgable people have said on this blog, the approval or rejection of a charter petition is ultimately a mechanical exercise. That is, does the charter proposal meet these X criteria or not? If the VO charter meets them, then it will have to be approved. If it does not, because of a few minor details, then a simple amendment can be made and the process will move forward.
DON WINTERS: “What we have in this community in a nutshell… are school leaders who proceed to build a new elementary school when one is not needed, promote a fiscal emergency where one does not exist, and select a school for closure based on the least amount of ‘push-back’ from the impacted community.”
What Don Winters says above is not entirely correct. When Korematsu was planned and construction began, the District believed that there was a need for a new K-6 school, given the number of children in Davis in that age group. By the time Korematsu was completed, however, the District realized that the assumptions about the K-6 student population were wrong. And that was then compounded by the citizens’ rejection of Measure X.
People make mistakes. It’s not fair to assume that they made those mistakes with malicious intent.
D. GREENWALD: “To me this again suggests that the district staff is bent on killing this effort, demoralizing the petitioners, and hoping that this resolution goes away.”
I don’t see how anyone could conclude otherwise. But ultimately, the elected school board members will have to make this decision. From what knowledgable people have said on this blog, the approval or rejection of a charter petition is ultimately a mechanical exercise. That is, does the charter proposal meet these X criteria or not? If the VO charter meets them, then it will have to be approved. If it does not, because of a few minor details, then a simple amendment can be made and the process will move forward.
DON WINTERS: “What we have in this community in a nutshell… are school leaders who proceed to build a new elementary school when one is not needed, promote a fiscal emergency where one does not exist, and select a school for closure based on the least amount of ‘push-back’ from the impacted community.”
What Don Winters says above is not entirely correct. When Korematsu was planned and construction began, the District believed that there was a need for a new K-6 school, given the number of children in Davis in that age group. By the time Korematsu was completed, however, the District realized that the assumptions about the K-6 student population were wrong. And that was then compounded by the citizens’ rejection of Measure X.
People make mistakes. It’s not fair to assume that they made those mistakes with malicious intent.
D. GREENWALD: “To me this again suggests that the district staff is bent on killing this effort, demoralizing the petitioners, and hoping that this resolution goes away.”
I don’t see how anyone could conclude otherwise. But ultimately, the elected school board members will have to make this decision. From what knowledgable people have said on this blog, the approval or rejection of a charter petition is ultimately a mechanical exercise. That is, does the charter proposal meet these X criteria or not? If the VO charter meets them, then it will have to be approved. If it does not, because of a few minor details, then a simple amendment can be made and the process will move forward.
Rich:
My initial belief was as you suggest: a mechanical exercise. However, within those mechanics appears to be considerable wiggle room that might ultimately have to be resolved by another entity.
My alarm came when Bill Storm pointed out to me that most of this could have been hashed out in July had the district been willing to meet with the petitioners.
I hope you are correct here, I fear you are not.
Rich:
My initial belief was as you suggest: a mechanical exercise. However, within those mechanics appears to be considerable wiggle room that might ultimately have to be resolved by another entity.
My alarm came when Bill Storm pointed out to me that most of this could have been hashed out in July had the district been willing to meet with the petitioners.
I hope you are correct here, I fear you are not.
Rich:
My initial belief was as you suggest: a mechanical exercise. However, within those mechanics appears to be considerable wiggle room that might ultimately have to be resolved by another entity.
My alarm came when Bill Storm pointed out to me that most of this could have been hashed out in July had the district been willing to meet with the petitioners.
I hope you are correct here, I fear you are not.
Rich:
My initial belief was as you suggest: a mechanical exercise. However, within those mechanics appears to be considerable wiggle room that might ultimately have to be resolved by another entity.
My alarm came when Bill Storm pointed out to me that most of this could have been hashed out in July had the district been willing to meet with the petitioners.
I hope you are correct here, I fear you are not.
“If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is – is there a loss of power or revenue with the introduction of a charter into the community?”
Mike,
I concede that I don’t know the answer to your question. However, I think it has to do with money.
The motivation for closing Valley Oak was to save on overhead. If the district could consolidate all of the K-6 kids into 8 schools, instead of 9, they would save a substantial amount of money on overhead per child. Their revenues would not go down, but their costs would.
However, if Valley Oak opens as a charter school, and hundreds of kids who would have attended other Davis elementaries go to Valley Oak charter, all of those overhead savings per child from closing Valley Oak would be lost. As such, the District fears the fiscal impact of VOC.
Additionally, I would guess that there is a bureaucratic impulse to nit-pick, regardless of whether the proposal was in the interests of the District or not. That is, the lawyer who came up with things like, “It does not guarantee that there will be no discrimination based on the sexual orientation of elementary school kids,” sees it as his/her job to point out little oversights. And that is fine — just let that be corrected and move on. If some of the objections are less trivial, then hopefully they can be worked out expeditiously, as well.
“If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is – is there a loss of power or revenue with the introduction of a charter into the community?”
Mike,
I concede that I don’t know the answer to your question. However, I think it has to do with money.
The motivation for closing Valley Oak was to save on overhead. If the district could consolidate all of the K-6 kids into 8 schools, instead of 9, they would save a substantial amount of money on overhead per child. Their revenues would not go down, but their costs would.
However, if Valley Oak opens as a charter school, and hundreds of kids who would have attended other Davis elementaries go to Valley Oak charter, all of those overhead savings per child from closing Valley Oak would be lost. As such, the District fears the fiscal impact of VOC.
Additionally, I would guess that there is a bureaucratic impulse to nit-pick, regardless of whether the proposal was in the interests of the District or not. That is, the lawyer who came up with things like, “It does not guarantee that there will be no discrimination based on the sexual orientation of elementary school kids,” sees it as his/her job to point out little oversights. And that is fine — just let that be corrected and move on. If some of the objections are less trivial, then hopefully they can be worked out expeditiously, as well.
“If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is – is there a loss of power or revenue with the introduction of a charter into the community?”
Mike,
I concede that I don’t know the answer to your question. However, I think it has to do with money.
The motivation for closing Valley Oak was to save on overhead. If the district could consolidate all of the K-6 kids into 8 schools, instead of 9, they would save a substantial amount of money on overhead per child. Their revenues would not go down, but their costs would.
However, if Valley Oak opens as a charter school, and hundreds of kids who would have attended other Davis elementaries go to Valley Oak charter, all of those overhead savings per child from closing Valley Oak would be lost. As such, the District fears the fiscal impact of VOC.
Additionally, I would guess that there is a bureaucratic impulse to nit-pick, regardless of whether the proposal was in the interests of the District or not. That is, the lawyer who came up with things like, “It does not guarantee that there will be no discrimination based on the sexual orientation of elementary school kids,” sees it as his/her job to point out little oversights. And that is fine — just let that be corrected and move on. If some of the objections are less trivial, then hopefully they can be worked out expeditiously, as well.
“If the district has an agenda to kill this charter as is suggested in the blog, I would like to hear what the motive is – is there a loss of power or revenue with the introduction of a charter into the community?”
Mike,
I concede that I don’t know the answer to your question. However, I think it has to do with money.
The motivation for closing Valley Oak was to save on overhead. If the district could consolidate all of the K-6 kids into 8 schools, instead of 9, they would save a substantial amount of money on overhead per child. Their revenues would not go down, but their costs would.
However, if Valley Oak opens as a charter school, and hundreds of kids who would have attended other Davis elementaries go to Valley Oak charter, all of those overhead savings per child from closing Valley Oak would be lost. As such, the District fears the fiscal impact of VOC.
Additionally, I would guess that there is a bureaucratic impulse to nit-pick, regardless of whether the proposal was in the interests of the District or not. That is, the lawyer who came up with things like, “It does not guarantee that there will be no discrimination based on the sexual orientation of elementary school kids,” sees it as his/her job to point out little oversights. And that is fine — just let that be corrected and move on. If some of the objections are less trivial, then hopefully they can be worked out expeditiously, as well.
After reading the District resolution, their challenges tell the tale.. namely, VO Charter School, if you go ahead, don’t count on any help from us.. This is remarkably similar to the District’s attitude towards the Spanish Immersion program in its early years,namely you’re(Spanish Immersion Parents Assoc.) on your own! Of course, the District was ready to step in when the accolades began.
After reading the District resolution, their challenges tell the tale.. namely, VO Charter School, if you go ahead, don’t count on any help from us.. This is remarkably similar to the District’s attitude towards the Spanish Immersion program in its early years,namely you’re(Spanish Immersion Parents Assoc.) on your own! Of course, the District was ready to step in when the accolades began.
After reading the District resolution, their challenges tell the tale.. namely, VO Charter School, if you go ahead, don’t count on any help from us.. This is remarkably similar to the District’s attitude towards the Spanish Immersion program in its early years,namely you’re(Spanish Immersion Parents Assoc.) on your own! Of course, the District was ready to step in when the accolades began.
After reading the District resolution, their challenges tell the tale.. namely, VO Charter School, if you go ahead, don’t count on any help from us.. This is remarkably similar to the District’s attitude towards the Spanish Immersion program in its early years,namely you’re(Spanish Immersion Parents Assoc.) on your own! Of course, the District was ready to step in when the accolades began.
Everyone should now realize that the problems at DJUSD did not go away with Murphy. The new supe should clear the field of admin bureaucrats and start fresh.
Everyone should now realize that the problems at DJUSD did not go away with Murphy. The new supe should clear the field of admin bureaucrats and start fresh.
Everyone should now realize that the problems at DJUSD did not go away with Murphy. The new supe should clear the field of admin bureaucrats and start fresh.
Everyone should now realize that the problems at DJUSD did not go away with Murphy. The new supe should clear the field of admin bureaucrats and start fresh.
That’s true and false. The problems did not disappear with Murphy because we are still paying for mistakes that Murphy made. Second, we still have a lot of the staff that Murphy hired.
That’s true and false. The problems did not disappear with Murphy because we are still paying for mistakes that Murphy made. Second, we still have a lot of the staff that Murphy hired.
That’s true and false. The problems did not disappear with Murphy because we are still paying for mistakes that Murphy made. Second, we still have a lot of the staff that Murphy hired.
That’s true and false. The problems did not disappear with Murphy because we are still paying for mistakes that Murphy made. Second, we still have a lot of the staff that Murphy hired.
VO Charter school advocates are just running into the same difficulties that have been around for decades for parents with kids that don’t fit perfectly into the mold that is provided by the District and its teachers and administrators. This is nothing new – as many families know and have experienced in Davis. It will be interesting to see how this is resolved.
VO Charter school advocates are just running into the same difficulties that have been around for decades for parents with kids that don’t fit perfectly into the mold that is provided by the District and its teachers and administrators. This is nothing new – as many families know and have experienced in Davis. It will be interesting to see how this is resolved.
VO Charter school advocates are just running into the same difficulties that have been around for decades for parents with kids that don’t fit perfectly into the mold that is provided by the District and its teachers and administrators. This is nothing new – as many families know and have experienced in Davis. It will be interesting to see how this is resolved.
VO Charter school advocates are just running into the same difficulties that have been around for decades for parents with kids that don’t fit perfectly into the mold that is provided by the District and its teachers and administrators. This is nothing new – as many families know and have experienced in Davis. It will be interesting to see how this is resolved.
Great Reporting DPD!
Based on the nitpicking by staff, it is clear they are going to do whatever it takes to kill the charter. Even if the supporters of Valley oak were able to tackle perfectly every one of the staff’s points, they’d come up with a dozen more.
If the people of Valley Oak want their school, they are going to have to fight for it. They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it. That will speak volumes to certain incoming school board members.
fight fire with napalm.
Great Reporting DPD!
Based on the nitpicking by staff, it is clear they are going to do whatever it takes to kill the charter. Even if the supporters of Valley oak were able to tackle perfectly every one of the staff’s points, they’d come up with a dozen more.
If the people of Valley Oak want their school, they are going to have to fight for it. They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it. That will speak volumes to certain incoming school board members.
fight fire with napalm.
Great Reporting DPD!
Based on the nitpicking by staff, it is clear they are going to do whatever it takes to kill the charter. Even if the supporters of Valley oak were able to tackle perfectly every one of the staff’s points, they’d come up with a dozen more.
If the people of Valley Oak want their school, they are going to have to fight for it. They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it. That will speak volumes to certain incoming school board members.
fight fire with napalm.
Great Reporting DPD!
Based on the nitpicking by staff, it is clear they are going to do whatever it takes to kill the charter. Even if the supporters of Valley oak were able to tackle perfectly every one of the staff’s points, they’d come up with a dozen more.
If the people of Valley Oak want their school, they are going to have to fight for it. They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it. That will speak volumes to certain incoming school board members.
fight fire with napalm.
They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it.
Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.
They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it.
Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.
They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it.
Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.
They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it.
Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.
Anonymous said…
They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it.
Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.
12/3/07 1:48 PM
Precisely. This one is heading to superior court, as was fairly evident after the election result was announced.
–Richard Estes
Anonymous said…
They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it.
Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.
12/3/07 1:48 PM
Precisely. This one is heading to superior court, as was fairly evident after the election result was announced.
–Richard Estes
Anonymous said…
They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it.
Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.
12/3/07 1:48 PM
Precisely. This one is heading to superior court, as was fairly evident after the election result was announced.
–Richard Estes
Anonymous said…
They need to show up en masse at the school board meeting and make it clear their will be political consequences for those who vote to kill it.
Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.
12/3/07 1:48 PM
Precisely. This one is heading to superior court, as was fairly evident after the election result was announced.
–Richard Estes
“Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.”
Good point. What I was referrring to though was Harris. The writing is on the wall he wants to seek higher office. He isn’t there yet. Harris won, and congratulations to him. What that doesn’t mean though is he necessarily won because he was well liked. I have to admit his opponents stunk. Heck, Spector didn’t campaign, and his name wasn’t even on my sample ballot. But Harris stunk too. More voters however came to the conclusion Harris stunk less than the others. Whatever the reason, considering the popularity of the Valley Oak charter Harris would do well to tread lightly.
“Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.”
Good point. What I was referrring to though was Harris. The writing is on the wall he wants to seek higher office. He isn’t there yet. Harris won, and congratulations to him. What that doesn’t mean though is he necessarily won because he was well liked. I have to admit his opponents stunk. Heck, Spector didn’t campaign, and his name wasn’t even on my sample ballot. But Harris stunk too. More voters however came to the conclusion Harris stunk less than the others. Whatever the reason, considering the popularity of the Valley Oak charter Harris would do well to tread lightly.
“Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.”
Good point. What I was referrring to though was Harris. The writing is on the wall he wants to seek higher office. He isn’t there yet. Harris won, and congratulations to him. What that doesn’t mean though is he necessarily won because he was well liked. I have to admit his opponents stunk. Heck, Spector didn’t campaign, and his name wasn’t even on my sample ballot. But Harris stunk too. More voters however came to the conclusion Harris stunk less than the others. Whatever the reason, considering the popularity of the Valley Oak charter Harris would do well to tread lightly.
“Considering the two strongest supporters of the charter both lost the school board election in November, it’s hard to imagine what “political consequences” would be likely to happen.”
Good point. What I was referrring to though was Harris. The writing is on the wall he wants to seek higher office. He isn’t there yet. Harris won, and congratulations to him. What that doesn’t mean though is he necessarily won because he was well liked. I have to admit his opponents stunk. Heck, Spector didn’t campaign, and his name wasn’t even on my sample ballot. But Harris stunk too. More voters however came to the conclusion Harris stunk less than the others. Whatever the reason, considering the popularity of the Valley Oak charter Harris would do well to tread lightly.
I am quoting from the Davis Enterprise: “In dense legal language, the proposed resolution also asserts that the petition “does not contain a reasonably comprehensive description” of the proposed charter school’s educational program, measurable pupil outcomes, methods to assist pupil progress, the school’s governance structure, employee qualifications and employee rights, admissions criteria, the method for annual audits, procedures for suspension or expulsion of students, dispute resolution procedures, and the manner in which administrative services are to be provided, among other issues.”
Maybe I missed something here. My understanding was that Valley Oak Charter School was going to implement the same programs it always had, and add some new ones for good measure to make it an even better school. If I am correct in my assumptions, then what is the district staff saying here? That Valley Oak passed muster prior to the school board’s decision to close it, but suddenly is now somehow deficient? This tortured logic does not even pass the laugh test!
I am quoting from the Davis Enterprise: “In dense legal language, the proposed resolution also asserts that the petition “does not contain a reasonably comprehensive description” of the proposed charter school’s educational program, measurable pupil outcomes, methods to assist pupil progress, the school’s governance structure, employee qualifications and employee rights, admissions criteria, the method for annual audits, procedures for suspension or expulsion of students, dispute resolution procedures, and the manner in which administrative services are to be provided, among other issues.”
Maybe I missed something here. My understanding was that Valley Oak Charter School was going to implement the same programs it always had, and add some new ones for good measure to make it an even better school. If I am correct in my assumptions, then what is the district staff saying here? That Valley Oak passed muster prior to the school board’s decision to close it, but suddenly is now somehow deficient? This tortured logic does not even pass the laugh test!
I am quoting from the Davis Enterprise: “In dense legal language, the proposed resolution also asserts that the petition “does not contain a reasonably comprehensive description” of the proposed charter school’s educational program, measurable pupil outcomes, methods to assist pupil progress, the school’s governance structure, employee qualifications and employee rights, admissions criteria, the method for annual audits, procedures for suspension or expulsion of students, dispute resolution procedures, and the manner in which administrative services are to be provided, among other issues.”
Maybe I missed something here. My understanding was that Valley Oak Charter School was going to implement the same programs it always had, and add some new ones for good measure to make it an even better school. If I am correct in my assumptions, then what is the district staff saying here? That Valley Oak passed muster prior to the school board’s decision to close it, but suddenly is now somehow deficient? This tortured logic does not even pass the laugh test!
I am quoting from the Davis Enterprise: “In dense legal language, the proposed resolution also asserts that the petition “does not contain a reasonably comprehensive description” of the proposed charter school’s educational program, measurable pupil outcomes, methods to assist pupil progress, the school’s governance structure, employee qualifications and employee rights, admissions criteria, the method for annual audits, procedures for suspension or expulsion of students, dispute resolution procedures, and the manner in which administrative services are to be provided, among other issues.”
Maybe I missed something here. My understanding was that Valley Oak Charter School was going to implement the same programs it always had, and add some new ones for good measure to make it an even better school. If I am correct in my assumptions, then what is the district staff saying here? That Valley Oak passed muster prior to the school board’s decision to close it, but suddenly is now somehow deficient? This tortured logic does not even pass the laugh test!
I believe the charter petition can go to the county board of education for passage. The county then has sixty days to respond to the charter, as did the Davis board of ed.
It looks like the district staff could meet with the charter people between now and Thursday’s meeting, hammer out these “difficulties,” and then recommend passage of the charter; or the charter group can merely pick up their marbles and go over the Davis brd. of ed.’s head the county for passage.
Th real issue is two-fold, loss of revenues/ADA to the district, and loss of control. The questions from the board members at the last meeting bear this out.
In general, a charter school is a risky thing for a district. This charter is particularly well-written,(see the VOcharter website,) by particularly thoughtfull, well-qualified people. I would hope the district would throw its support behind this charter from its inception rather than waste this opportunity at healing the wounds from previous board decisions.
At the initial presentation to the board some months ago, I heard B. Storm call this “an opportunity to make lemonade from lemons.”
I believe the charter petition can go to the county board of education for passage. The county then has sixty days to respond to the charter, as did the Davis board of ed.
It looks like the district staff could meet with the charter people between now and Thursday’s meeting, hammer out these “difficulties,” and then recommend passage of the charter; or the charter group can merely pick up their marbles and go over the Davis brd. of ed.’s head the county for passage.
Th real issue is two-fold, loss of revenues/ADA to the district, and loss of control. The questions from the board members at the last meeting bear this out.
In general, a charter school is a risky thing for a district. This charter is particularly well-written,(see the VOcharter website,) by particularly thoughtfull, well-qualified people. I would hope the district would throw its support behind this charter from its inception rather than waste this opportunity at healing the wounds from previous board decisions.
At the initial presentation to the board some months ago, I heard B. Storm call this “an opportunity to make lemonade from lemons.”
I believe the charter petition can go to the county board of education for passage. The county then has sixty days to respond to the charter, as did the Davis board of ed.
It looks like the district staff could meet with the charter people between now and Thursday’s meeting, hammer out these “difficulties,” and then recommend passage of the charter; or the charter group can merely pick up their marbles and go over the Davis brd. of ed.’s head the county for passage.
Th real issue is two-fold, loss of revenues/ADA to the district, and loss of control. The questions from the board members at the last meeting bear this out.
In general, a charter school is a risky thing for a district. This charter is particularly well-written,(see the VOcharter website,) by particularly thoughtfull, well-qualified people. I would hope the district would throw its support behind this charter from its inception rather than waste this opportunity at healing the wounds from previous board decisions.
At the initial presentation to the board some months ago, I heard B. Storm call this “an opportunity to make lemonade from lemons.”
I believe the charter petition can go to the county board of education for passage. The county then has sixty days to respond to the charter, as did the Davis board of ed.
It looks like the district staff could meet with the charter people between now and Thursday’s meeting, hammer out these “difficulties,” and then recommend passage of the charter; or the charter group can merely pick up their marbles and go over the Davis brd. of ed.’s head the county for passage.
Th real issue is two-fold, loss of revenues/ADA to the district, and loss of control. The questions from the board members at the last meeting bear this out.
In general, a charter school is a risky thing for a district. This charter is particularly well-written,(see the VOcharter website,) by particularly thoughtfull, well-qualified people. I would hope the district would throw its support behind this charter from its inception rather than waste this opportunity at healing the wounds from previous board decisions.
At the initial presentation to the board some months ago, I heard B. Storm call this “an opportunity to make lemonade from lemons.”
Close Valley Oak, deny a charter school and dedicate more resources to gate creating a gate magnet school. Priorities priorities.
As for the blog administrator’s statement “For those who think that our school system will continue to keep our home values high…” If they somehow caused the values of homes to come down to reasonable levels then young families would be able to afford to live here and enrollment would go up solving the entire problem. It is the lack of housing people with children can afford along with prop 13 developer fees forcing the district to build a new school that have created this mess.
Close Valley Oak, deny a charter school and dedicate more resources to gate creating a gate magnet school. Priorities priorities.
As for the blog administrator’s statement “For those who think that our school system will continue to keep our home values high…” If they somehow caused the values of homes to come down to reasonable levels then young families would be able to afford to live here and enrollment would go up solving the entire problem. It is the lack of housing people with children can afford along with prop 13 developer fees forcing the district to build a new school that have created this mess.
Close Valley Oak, deny a charter school and dedicate more resources to gate creating a gate magnet school. Priorities priorities.
As for the blog administrator’s statement “For those who think that our school system will continue to keep our home values high…” If they somehow caused the values of homes to come down to reasonable levels then young families would be able to afford to live here and enrollment would go up solving the entire problem. It is the lack of housing people with children can afford along with prop 13 developer fees forcing the district to build a new school that have created this mess.
Close Valley Oak, deny a charter school and dedicate more resources to gate creating a gate magnet school. Priorities priorities.
As for the blog administrator’s statement “For those who think that our school system will continue to keep our home values high…” If they somehow caused the values of homes to come down to reasonable levels then young families would be able to afford to live here and enrollment would go up solving the entire problem. It is the lack of housing people with children can afford along with prop 13 developer fees forcing the district to build a new school that have created this mess.
I would think that once a Charter School was up and going, the oversight monitoring through testing, etc. would be in the hands of the County and State rather than the DJUSD. Mandatory local test monitoring would only make sense if the DJUSD could pull the plug on a Charter School once it was approved, up and running.
I would think that once a Charter School was up and going, the oversight monitoring through testing, etc. would be in the hands of the County and State rather than the DJUSD. Mandatory local test monitoring would only make sense if the DJUSD could pull the plug on a Charter School once it was approved, up and running.
I would think that once a Charter School was up and going, the oversight monitoring through testing, etc. would be in the hands of the County and State rather than the DJUSD. Mandatory local test monitoring would only make sense if the DJUSD could pull the plug on a Charter School once it was approved, up and running.
I would think that once a Charter School was up and going, the oversight monitoring through testing, etc. would be in the hands of the County and State rather than the DJUSD. Mandatory local test monitoring would only make sense if the DJUSD could pull the plug on a Charter School once it was approved, up and running.
I don’t believe that the new Superintendent has had a full opportunity to weigh into the District/Valley Oak petitioners interactiond in the past. We will all be watching closely his response to the Charter petition and his grasp on the reins of the District bureaucracy.
I don’t believe that the new Superintendent has had a full opportunity to weigh into the District/Valley Oak petitioners interactiond in the past. We will all be watching closely his response to the Charter petition and his grasp on the reins of the District bureaucracy.
I don’t believe that the new Superintendent has had a full opportunity to weigh into the District/Valley Oak petitioners interactiond in the past. We will all be watching closely his response to the Charter petition and his grasp on the reins of the District bureaucracy.
I don’t believe that the new Superintendent has had a full opportunity to weigh into the District/Valley Oak petitioners interactiond in the past. We will all be watching closely his response to the Charter petition and his grasp on the reins of the District bureaucracy.
“Close Valley Oak, deny a charter school and dedicate more resources to gate creating a gate magnet school. Priorities priorities.”
This has nothing to do with GATE. No more resources will be devoted to GATE. If you look at the information, the proposal for the GATE magnet school came from the GATE office and not the district. The suggestion was quickly shot down. It does not have “legs”. The reality of this situation is that when they made the decision to close Valley Oak, they only looked at the raw numbers of kids and did not really account for the GATE program as a whole. Right now, there is no place for the GATE program. If anything, the VO GATE program will suffer from this decision.
“Close Valley Oak, deny a charter school and dedicate more resources to gate creating a gate magnet school. Priorities priorities.”
This has nothing to do with GATE. No more resources will be devoted to GATE. If you look at the information, the proposal for the GATE magnet school came from the GATE office and not the district. The suggestion was quickly shot down. It does not have “legs”. The reality of this situation is that when they made the decision to close Valley Oak, they only looked at the raw numbers of kids and did not really account for the GATE program as a whole. Right now, there is no place for the GATE program. If anything, the VO GATE program will suffer from this decision.
“Close Valley Oak, deny a charter school and dedicate more resources to gate creating a gate magnet school. Priorities priorities.”
This has nothing to do with GATE. No more resources will be devoted to GATE. If you look at the information, the proposal for the GATE magnet school came from the GATE office and not the district. The suggestion was quickly shot down. It does not have “legs”. The reality of this situation is that when they made the decision to close Valley Oak, they only looked at the raw numbers of kids and did not really account for the GATE program as a whole. Right now, there is no place for the GATE program. If anything, the VO GATE program will suffer from this decision.
“Close Valley Oak, deny a charter school and dedicate more resources to gate creating a gate magnet school. Priorities priorities.”
This has nothing to do with GATE. No more resources will be devoted to GATE. If you look at the information, the proposal for the GATE magnet school came from the GATE office and not the district. The suggestion was quickly shot down. It does not have “legs”. The reality of this situation is that when they made the decision to close Valley Oak, they only looked at the raw numbers of kids and did not really account for the GATE program as a whole. Right now, there is no place for the GATE program. If anything, the VO GATE program will suffer from this decision.
“The firing of Murphy which left the rest of the District administration in place was bound to have some serious blow-back.”
Murphy was the last in a long line of connected characters to leave.
“District staff appear to have assumed an openly passive-aggressive posture to to the rejection of their leader….”
You are SO off the mark here…
“The firing of Murphy which left the rest of the District administration in place was bound to have some serious blow-back.”
Murphy was the last in a long line of connected characters to leave.
“District staff appear to have assumed an openly passive-aggressive posture to to the rejection of their leader….”
You are SO off the mark here…
“The firing of Murphy which left the rest of the District administration in place was bound to have some serious blow-back.”
Murphy was the last in a long line of connected characters to leave.
“District staff appear to have assumed an openly passive-aggressive posture to to the rejection of their leader….”
You are SO off the mark here…
“The firing of Murphy which left the rest of the District administration in place was bound to have some serious blow-back.”
Murphy was the last in a long line of connected characters to leave.
“District staff appear to have assumed an openly passive-aggressive posture to to the rejection of their leader….”
You are SO off the mark here…
well said Rich Rifkin in answering Mikes quesitons.
It would make sense to be concerned if they have had half a year to work out the legits and are dragging their feet, as DPD implied.
I wonder what other monies the charter school can bring in. What about the four million that the H.S. in Sac got a few years back from bill and melinda gates? Unlike VO that school started out witn a bad History and would be more risky to be giving monies too.
well said Rich Rifkin in answering Mikes quesitons.
It would make sense to be concerned if they have had half a year to work out the legits and are dragging their feet, as DPD implied.
I wonder what other monies the charter school can bring in. What about the four million that the H.S. in Sac got a few years back from bill and melinda gates? Unlike VO that school started out witn a bad History and would be more risky to be giving monies too.
well said Rich Rifkin in answering Mikes quesitons.
It would make sense to be concerned if they have had half a year to work out the legits and are dragging their feet, as DPD implied.
I wonder what other monies the charter school can bring in. What about the four million that the H.S. in Sac got a few years back from bill and melinda gates? Unlike VO that school started out witn a bad History and would be more risky to be giving monies too.
well said Rich Rifkin in answering Mikes quesitons.
It would make sense to be concerned if they have had half a year to work out the legits and are dragging their feet, as DPD implied.
I wonder what other monies the charter school can bring in. What about the four million that the H.S. in Sac got a few years back from bill and melinda gates? Unlike VO that school started out witn a bad History and would be more risky to be giving monies too.
Piece in the Enterprise today,Tues, Dec 4. Evidently, the legal opinion on the denial of the petition is NOT YET READY. Questions: Why is the Assoc. Superintendent taking center-stage on this issue? Where is our new Superintendent? How does the District “square” recommending denial of the petition while mouthing a desire to meet with the petitioners to find solutions to the District’s concerns? If they are really serious about working with the
VO petitioners, why not recommend no action until these issues are ironed out? Our new Superintendent better take control of this or he will be painted with the same brush as his mealymouthed staff.
Piece in the Enterprise today,Tues, Dec 4. Evidently, the legal opinion on the denial of the petition is NOT YET READY. Questions: Why is the Assoc. Superintendent taking center-stage on this issue? Where is our new Superintendent? How does the District “square” recommending denial of the petition while mouthing a desire to meet with the petitioners to find solutions to the District’s concerns? If they are really serious about working with the
VO petitioners, why not recommend no action until these issues are ironed out? Our new Superintendent better take control of this or he will be painted with the same brush as his mealymouthed staff.
Piece in the Enterprise today,Tues, Dec 4. Evidently, the legal opinion on the denial of the petition is NOT YET READY. Questions: Why is the Assoc. Superintendent taking center-stage on this issue? Where is our new Superintendent? How does the District “square” recommending denial of the petition while mouthing a desire to meet with the petitioners to find solutions to the District’s concerns? If they are really serious about working with the
VO petitioners, why not recommend no action until these issues are ironed out? Our new Superintendent better take control of this or he will be painted with the same brush as his mealymouthed staff.
Piece in the Enterprise today,Tues, Dec 4. Evidently, the legal opinion on the denial of the petition is NOT YET READY. Questions: Why is the Assoc. Superintendent taking center-stage on this issue? Where is our new Superintendent? How does the District “square” recommending denial of the petition while mouthing a desire to meet with the petitioners to find solutions to the District’s concerns? If they are really serious about working with the
VO petitioners, why not recommend no action until these issues are ironed out? Our new Superintendent better take control of this or he will be painted with the same brush as his mealymouthed staff.
The simple answer is that the new superintendent is new and has not been involved in this issue.
The simple answer is that the new superintendent is new and has not been involved in this issue.
The simple answer is that the new superintendent is new and has not been involved in this issue.
The simple answer is that the new superintendent is new and has not been involved in this issue.
Tusday 4Th.
The reason the legal opinion “isn’t ready yet” is that every item in the “resolution” statement from the district is bogus.
The County Brd. of Ed. will gladly ratify the charter proposal and all the charter group will have lost is another sixty days.(If that.)
On the other hand, the Davis Brd. of Ed. will look like fools.
Tusday 4Th.
The reason the legal opinion “isn’t ready yet” is that every item in the “resolution” statement from the district is bogus.
The County Brd. of Ed. will gladly ratify the charter proposal and all the charter group will have lost is another sixty days.(If that.)
On the other hand, the Davis Brd. of Ed. will look like fools.
Tusday 4Th.
The reason the legal opinion “isn’t ready yet” is that every item in the “resolution” statement from the district is bogus.
The County Brd. of Ed. will gladly ratify the charter proposal and all the charter group will have lost is another sixty days.(If that.)
On the other hand, the Davis Brd. of Ed. will look like fools.
Tusday 4Th.
The reason the legal opinion “isn’t ready yet” is that every item in the “resolution” statement from the district is bogus.
The County Brd. of Ed. will gladly ratify the charter proposal and all the charter group will have lost is another sixty days.(If that.)
On the other hand, the Davis Brd. of Ed. will look like fools.
Anonymous said…
The simple answer is that the new superintendent is new and has not been involved in this issue.
….doesn’t fly. He’s known that he had the job for some time now and that this was important. He’s had the time to get up to speed.
Anonymous said…
The simple answer is that the new superintendent is new and has not been involved in this issue.
….doesn’t fly. He’s known that he had the job for some time now and that this was important. He’s had the time to get up to speed.
Anonymous said…
The simple answer is that the new superintendent is new and has not been involved in this issue.
….doesn’t fly. He’s known that he had the job for some time now and that this was important. He’s had the time to get up to speed.
Anonymous said…
The simple answer is that the new superintendent is new and has not been involved in this issue.
….doesn’t fly. He’s known that he had the job for some time now and that this was important. He’s had the time to get up to speed.
The fact that he’s “known” he’s had this job doesn’t mean he can take over the technical response to a charter petition. Besides, I’m not sure that is something the Superintendent would ever do.
The fact that he’s “known” he’s had this job doesn’t mean he can take over the technical response to a charter petition. Besides, I’m not sure that is something the Superintendent would ever do.
The fact that he’s “known” he’s had this job doesn’t mean he can take over the technical response to a charter petition. Besides, I’m not sure that is something the Superintendent would ever do.
The fact that he’s “known” he’s had this job doesn’t mean he can take over the technical response to a charter petition. Besides, I’m not sure that is something the Superintendent would ever do.
The new superintendent is from Washington State where there is no charter law. He’s relying on the advice of his staff. That would be G. Davis and B. Colby in this matter. .
The new superintendent is from Washington State where there is no charter law. He’s relying on the advice of his staff. That would be G. Davis and B. Colby in this matter. .
The new superintendent is from Washington State where there is no charter law. He’s relying on the advice of his staff. That would be G. Davis and B. Colby in this matter. .
The new superintendent is from Washington State where there is no charter law. He’s relying on the advice of his staff. That would be G. Davis and B. Colby in this matter. .
The superintendent of the DJUSD is being paid near a quarter of a million dollars/yr; he “owns” all District decisions.
The superintendent of the DJUSD is being paid near a quarter of a million dollars/yr; he “owns” all District decisions.
The superintendent of the DJUSD is being paid near a quarter of a million dollars/yr; he “owns” all District decisions.
The superintendent of the DJUSD is being paid near a quarter of a million dollars/yr; he “owns” all District decisions.
For a Quarter Million Dollar Baby you’d think he’d get better advice…
For a Quarter Million Dollar Baby you’d think he’d get better advice…
For a Quarter Million Dollar Baby you’d think he’d get better advice…
For a Quarter Million Dollar Baby you’d think he’d get better advice…
The Valley Oak group has posted a rebuttal to the district’s Resolution No.33-08 document. It’s up on their web site: http://www.vocharter.org
It looks significant and bears out much of what has been discussed here. It is odd that an attorney with an expertise in charter law can’t formulate a response (…”the legal opinion is not yet ready…”)in the same amount of time a group of volunteers for the charter could write a response to a “densley written” sixteen item resolution from the district.
The Valley Oak group has posted a rebuttal to the district’s Resolution No.33-08 document. It’s up on their web site: http://www.vocharter.org
It looks significant and bears out much of what has been discussed here. It is odd that an attorney with an expertise in charter law can’t formulate a response (…”the legal opinion is not yet ready…”)in the same amount of time a group of volunteers for the charter could write a response to a “densley written” sixteen item resolution from the district.
The Valley Oak group has posted a rebuttal to the district’s Resolution No.33-08 document. It’s up on their web site: http://www.vocharter.org
It looks significant and bears out much of what has been discussed here. It is odd that an attorney with an expertise in charter law can’t formulate a response (…”the legal opinion is not yet ready…”)in the same amount of time a group of volunteers for the charter could write a response to a “densley written” sixteen item resolution from the district.
The Valley Oak group has posted a rebuttal to the district’s Resolution No.33-08 document. It’s up on their web site: http://www.vocharter.org
It looks significant and bears out much of what has been discussed here. It is odd that an attorney with an expertise in charter law can’t formulate a response (…”the legal opinion is not yet ready…”)in the same amount of time a group of volunteers for the charter could write a response to a “densley written” sixteen item resolution from the district.
There is a clash of cultures in Davis—those who care about the underserved and those who don’t. The district administrators and school board make a lot of noise about caring but actions speak louder than words. English learners(recent immigrants) are obviously not high on the priority list if they are so ready to dismantle the best EL program in the district. And here Davis supposedly embraces diversity. (I have heard SO many times comments from parents afraid of Valley Oak.) The administrators and school board members do not adequately value the historical and cultural diversity that Valley Oak represents, never have and never will. It was obvious in how hard it was to get the district to make the school look any better than a ghetto school with cyclone fencing when all the other schools got their shade structures, pretty gardens and play structures. And though Gini Davis hasn’t been here very long, it seems she too has that closed-minded attitude. I just hope that the new superintendent is willing to look at the subject through the eyes of those who share our values.
I am glad that the teachers and parents are putting up a fight that I’m sure the district didn’t expect. I thank the Davis Vanguard for allowing a great discussion of this important subject that is dear to many residents.
There is a clash of cultures in Davis—those who care about the underserved and those who don’t. The district administrators and school board make a lot of noise about caring but actions speak louder than words. English learners(recent immigrants) are obviously not high on the priority list if they are so ready to dismantle the best EL program in the district. And here Davis supposedly embraces diversity. (I have heard SO many times comments from parents afraid of Valley Oak.) The administrators and school board members do not adequately value the historical and cultural diversity that Valley Oak represents, never have and never will. It was obvious in how hard it was to get the district to make the school look any better than a ghetto school with cyclone fencing when all the other schools got their shade structures, pretty gardens and play structures. And though Gini Davis hasn’t been here very long, it seems she too has that closed-minded attitude. I just hope that the new superintendent is willing to look at the subject through the eyes of those who share our values.
I am glad that the teachers and parents are putting up a fight that I’m sure the district didn’t expect. I thank the Davis Vanguard for allowing a great discussion of this important subject that is dear to many residents.
There is a clash of cultures in Davis—those who care about the underserved and those who don’t. The district administrators and school board make a lot of noise about caring but actions speak louder than words. English learners(recent immigrants) are obviously not high on the priority list if they are so ready to dismantle the best EL program in the district. And here Davis supposedly embraces diversity. (I have heard SO many times comments from parents afraid of Valley Oak.) The administrators and school board members do not adequately value the historical and cultural diversity that Valley Oak represents, never have and never will. It was obvious in how hard it was to get the district to make the school look any better than a ghetto school with cyclone fencing when all the other schools got their shade structures, pretty gardens and play structures. And though Gini Davis hasn’t been here very long, it seems she too has that closed-minded attitude. I just hope that the new superintendent is willing to look at the subject through the eyes of those who share our values.
I am glad that the teachers and parents are putting up a fight that I’m sure the district didn’t expect. I thank the Davis Vanguard for allowing a great discussion of this important subject that is dear to many residents.
There is a clash of cultures in Davis—those who care about the underserved and those who don’t. The district administrators and school board make a lot of noise about caring but actions speak louder than words. English learners(recent immigrants) are obviously not high on the priority list if they are so ready to dismantle the best EL program in the district. And here Davis supposedly embraces diversity. (I have heard SO many times comments from parents afraid of Valley Oak.) The administrators and school board members do not adequately value the historical and cultural diversity that Valley Oak represents, never have and never will. It was obvious in how hard it was to get the district to make the school look any better than a ghetto school with cyclone fencing when all the other schools got their shade structures, pretty gardens and play structures. And though Gini Davis hasn’t been here very long, it seems she too has that closed-minded attitude. I just hope that the new superintendent is willing to look at the subject through the eyes of those who share our values.
I am glad that the teachers and parents are putting up a fight that I’m sure the district didn’t expect. I thank the Davis Vanguard for allowing a great discussion of this important subject that is dear to many residents.