School Bond: $200 M with no Citizens Facility Committee?
Original post made by Steven Nelson on Jan 23, 2012
expansion and improvement bond - led by Trustee Fiona Walter and
Superintendent Craig Goldman. I'm in favor of schools improvement,
but I REALLY believe that citizen input to improve the $432 Million
Facility Plan is needed first.
What do you think? Was a 2 Board, 3 Administrator, 4 Architect SFIP
Committee the final say in how we should spend? What about a
"7-11 Committee" like the CA Dept. of Education recommends as
"best practice" for a community? The SFIP does not have any money
for reopening a neighborhood school in Whisman/Slatter area. Is that
fine to bus the kids from that area? That area has as many minors in the
population as the Huff Census Tract (2010 data).
Should all expansion be done on the current elementary sites?
Should the Whisman School lease be recaptured in 2014 (midterm
option)? Should we get back that school for 460 students?
The Voter Opinion Survey just completed shows there is no significant
difference if a vote is taken June (no citizen "7-11 Committee") or
November (plenty of time for formal community committee reporting to
If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.
Services, Dining and Shopping Downtown in Palo Alto
By Steve Levy | 16 comments | 2,313 views
Handmade truffle shop now open in downtown Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 3 comments | 2,076 views
It's the End of the World as We Know It: "Snowpiercer"
By Anita Felicelli | 1 comment | 1,518 views