Comments on: San Carlos School District Proposes New School Boundaries.

By: BB

BB — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 23:51:52 +0000

I don’t send my kids to private school because I like the diversity they get at public.

By: BB

BB — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 20:13:44 +0000

AR,
Like I said…I will STILL support the schools. But, it will be through the time I spend in the classroom helping out the teachers, teaching Art in Action, helping with FOSS science experiments, etc., etc., etc. What that’s not good enough for you? My time is actually very valuable.

Didn’t mean to ruffle your feathers so much! Sorry.

By: Arundel Parent

Arundel Parent — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 14:37:36 +0000

BB — that is such a rant, I don’t know how to do that justice without a rant back, which I am above. However I must agree with Heathermon above — it’s hard for you to grab the moral highground when you’re essentially threatening to take away support from our public schools if things don’t go your way. We may disagree on the implications for Arundel here, but I think it’s undeniable that you’re blowing this so out of proportion — I’m not sure what’s gotten you so wound up. Even in the worst case scenario (assuming everyone in Devonshire Canyon would have walked to Arundel every day — which we know is not true), we’re talking about less than 10 cars per year. And that ingnores the fact that current plan shows a larger area (in terms of students) leaving Arundel than what it is gaining. So, besides helping with our own enrollment issues (which we did have only last year), that may actually lower the total number of cars, even if there is a percentage increase in drivers. You’re also forgetting that the a subcommittee representing all of the schools is the one that came up with the proposal, and in the Board meeting they said 100% of the subcommittee members agreed on the plan. So I may personally disagree with some aspects of it (and I hope they do shift a couple of those streets closer to Arundel), but to get so wound up and emotional seems a litle odd to me. I’d rather the school leaders focus on the monumental State budget cuts, because those can have real impacts for our kids. I reserve my outrage for the State and what it is doing to education in California.

By: Another Arundel parent

Another Arundel parent — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 07:06:57 +0000

HM,
I’m probably just blowing steam. But just in case, my family has donated way over our fair share of money, time, services, and goods. I will continue to donate my time directly to the teachers, which is the best gift I give.

By: Heathermom

Heathermom — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 00:21:34 +0000

BB – Of course I hope you will reconsider your threat to withhold financial support if things don’t go the way you’d like them to, but if not why not go one step further and pull your kids out of public school altogether? In fact I would challenge any parent with a similar attitude to do the same. Surely one can see the hypocrisy of keeping one’s kids in public school where they will continue to benefit from the financial support those of us will continue to give to our PTAs and SCEF.

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:53:11 +0000

Excuse me but how exactly does spending more money on a house correlate to higher IQs in children?

I find your post offensive and ill-informed.

Both of my children had 4.0 averages, won Presidential scholastic awards, were part of the Gate program, and one was one of two seventh graders from her middle school to be placed in the Stanford Science Program.

My eldest is at Carlmont with a 4.38 GPA.

Maybe the scores would go *up* in your school if you were lucky enough to have “East San Carlos Kids” attending your neighborhood school.

I suggest that you spend some time thinking about what public education really means. You may want to send your kids to private school so they aren’t contaminated by the “riff-raff” and I sincerely hope that it doesn’t mean you have to trade down your house and move to my neighborhood in order to afford it.

By: BB

BB — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 06:14:09 +0000

Arundel Parent-

First of all, the City Manager isn’t the one who would make an opinion on traffic, that would be the Public Works Director…HELLO! I’ve spoken with Robert about this myself, before and after, Craig spoke to him. I was happy to cut and paste his comments for all to view: Baically, my question to Robert was, “Would these boundary changes increase the traffic on Phelps and San Carlos Ave.?”

His response:

“I think that you have good points about how the boundary change could
affect walking and driving commute patterns to school. I’ll get in
touch with Dr. Baker and discuss the situation with him.”

Robert discussed the numbers with Dr. Baker, mind you this is after Seth Rosenblatt had lied to Dr. Baker by telling him that “nobody” walked from the Devonshire area.

Anyway this was Robert Weil’s response after speaking to Craig:

“After speaking with Dr. Baker this morning, I don’t think that the
changes will significantly affect traffic congestion or walkability for
Arundel School. There are a small number of students in the east San
Carlos area (20 overall and only 4 incoming kindergarteners) who would
shift to Arundel from Brittan Acres. The distance to Brittan Acres from
east San Carlos represents a major disincentive to walk and that will
not change with the reassignment to Arundel. As to the dark orange area
which would shift from Arundel to Heather, there is already a strong
disincentive to walk to school due to the narrow streets without
sidewalks and the hills, and that would not change with the reassignment
to Heather. Again, there are a small number of students involved in
that area. Lastly, the route to Heather from this area offers one
advantage over the route to Arundel – it does not require crossing an
arterial street. On the other hand, it does require climbing up hill on
Torino Drive.”

So based on the skewed numbers Robert Weil was given, because NOBODY knows for sure how many kids would come from Laureola and these numbers are projections for next year only, what happens in the future, you know it’s always a good thing to look to the future when deciding these sorts of things. Robert did NOT say with 100% certainty that these changes would not affect traffic. He said “I don’t think they will”

So, I think the Board is obligated to do a traffic study or they could create a HUGE mess. NOBODY at Arundel wants any more traffic on Phelps. Not only will more traffic deter the walkers we already have (which translates to even more traffic), but Phelps absolutely cannot handle more traffic because it is absolutely maxed out with cars, it is so narrow that cars have to pull over to pass one another and the children HAVE to walk in the street. If your an Arundel parent than open your eyes.

People at Arundel are outraged because they are loosing their ability to walk to school. This has nothing to do with not wanting to go to Heather or not wanting the Laureola people to come to us.

Now, last year I spoke a lot to Steve Mitrovich regarding Torino and how unsafe this road is to travel. He brought it to my attention. He would NEVER have approved sending these kids from Devonshire over that road to Heather, because morally it’s the wrong thing to do. It’s a HUGE safety issue.

I’m pretty sure Craig Baker wouldn’t be that reckless either.

The main reason Arundel is against this is because of the safety issues. The roll out of this whole thing was awful and now they have pitted school against school… BIG mistake. It seems to me like 3 of the Board members have there own agenda and are not looking at any other solutions. I don’t know what it is because I wasn’t in that meeting with WO. They’ve been trying to do this for some time now. No wonder Steve Mitrovich, (who I share a passion for fishing with) finally got sick of hearing it and left. He was an asset to our District and now he’s gone.

Regarding Heather: I feel bad for Heather. The Board/Dist. has been dumping on this school for too long. This is a great school with great teachers and wonderful people. The proof is when they go to TL… just look at those API scores! The SCSD has unfairly treated them for some time now. Now, it seems they want to start doing it to Arundel. This whole thing makes me sick to my stomach. Have some decency!

Laureola people, we’re cool with you too. You’re situation is another unfortunate one brought on by a wreckless School Board/Dist. and I am sorry. You do not deserve the treatment you’ve been receiving.

By: Arundel parent

Arundel parent — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 23:13:19 +0000

BB — you’re just misreporting the facts. First of all, Dr. Baker said the city manager’s analysis was that the proposed changes would decrease traffic congestion, not add to it. Maybe you missed that part of the meeting. Also, this doesn’t change the enrollment at TL at all — there are no changes to middle school enrollment. That was made extremely clear…again maybe you missed that part. However, I do agree with you that the Board will likely postpone the decision, because that’s basically what Dr. Baker said in the meeting. But he said they’d probably just postpone it to January or so. And he did say he would look into potentially changing a couple of streets in the proposal that are closest to Arundel (assuming the numbers worked out). That was reasonable feedback from the community which he clearly took the heart.

By: BB

BB — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:18:16 +0000

Arundel Parent, Were you at the same meeting? Just about everyone I talked to before and after are against this. No they didn’t go about it in a thoughtful careful manner. Their plan as it is will create more traffic and make Phelps absolutely awful. Plus they are adding about 50-60 more kids to TL which is already impacted. Arundel parents are very nice… so although they weren’t yelling, they are against this. They are happy because Dr. Baker eluded that they will look at it more closely and make changes as needed. Dr. Baker is driving the Devonshire Canyon tomorrow just to see what a mess of a commute this change will lend to the Devonshire people going to Heather. Mark my words, at tonight’s meeting they will push off this decision so they can collect more data. That’s why were happy.

By: Arundel parent

Arundel parent — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 01:18:55 +0000

I was also at the Arundel meeting today, and BB I believe your characterization of the meeting is way off. It was my sense that almost everyone in the room (perhaps excluding you) understood why the changes are necessary and believes that the process has been very thorough. We all appreciated that Dr. Baker is extemely thoughtful about all of the issues and implications, and everyone at the meeting seemed grateful that he and the Board will take a little more time to listen to feedback before making a final decision. To be honest, I was skeptical entering the meeting (also feeling like this decision was made suddenly) but was pleasantly suprised once I got all of the facts.