Meeting in Los Altos Chambers: City Mayor Jarrett Fishpaw, BCS – Joe Hurd, John Phelps, Moderator, LASD – Steve Taglio, Mark Goines
Community Movers and Shakers Chagrined by Lockout.
During August there must have been quite a bit of behind the scenes chagrin expressed about the lockout of Bullis Charter School staff from their Blach classrooms among the local movers and shakers — council members of Cities of Los Altos and Los Altos Hill, and among community institutions like the Town Crier editorial group and the Los Altos Community Foundation (LACF). LASD vs. BCS tensions escalated during the lockout and when the Bullis Charter School Facilities Use Agreement (FUA) was signed under duress. In response to the disharmony, Joe Eyre, LACF Director, helped to orchestrate the scheduling of six joint subcommittee meetings to be hosted at the city council chambers of both towns.
The meeting topics would be the short term negotiation about the FUA enrollment caps, but also a conversation about crafting a long-term plan to acquire and develop new school sites, an effort that would require cooperation to pass a bond measure. LACF arranged for a professional moderator, for the meetings to be broadcast live, and also for posting videos for later online viewing. ( See each city’s website for its Granicus meeting recording pages-Special Meetings.)
MEETING SUMMARY: Hope with Gotchas
BCS asked for up to 175 students rather than 145, to be permitted at Blach, to stop barring k-3 grades from setting foot on Blach, to permit 4&5 graders to use most of the shared Blach special rooms, and to allow BCS to build a play structure at BCS expense on some “dead space.” LASD trustee Mark Goines sounded some positive notes with undertones of “gotchas.” It could perhaps be done safely he said. But BCS needed to provide more detailed week by week, by grade level occupancy headcount and room use plans on a room-by-room basis. In that way, the LASD board could 1) calculate and understand the Prop 39 reasonable equivalence of the changes and 2) could “get comfortable” with the safety of proposed changes. Taglio seemed to sound some additional cautionary notes, worrying about ripple effects in the school and broader community of more students arriving and departing.
Meeting One – August 27 Subcommittee
Safety of K-3 on Blach
Subcommittee Composition. BCS sent trustees John Phelps and Joe Hurd as representatives, while LASD sent trustees Mark Goines and Steve Taglio. To kick off the meeting, the moderator invited the subcommittee members to each give up to a 5-minute introduction.
The BCS side, Joe Hurd, spoke first asking, “Why the restrictions on younger kids at Blach?” The temporary camp site there in 2002 [sic while the elementary schools, except for the closed Bullis Purissima, were being remodeled] had all grade levels and over 500 k-6 students on site. Right now there is a five-room pre-school on Blach with pre-kindergarten kids. To BCS the restrictions felt like “discrimination.” For the camera closeup, BCS reiterated they had been locked out of Blach for about two weeks, and they had signed the FUA “under duress.”
“Today we are not discussing clauses in a contract, we are discussing children” Joe Hurd
The LASD side, Mark Goines, made these key opening remarks. “We have spent too long trying to find a way to work together more cooperatively. I’ve been at it for 10 years. Every year it seems to get harder, not easier. Every year we seem to drift apart in our view over the fine points, rather than trying to come together on the big picture.” Later Goines got his chance at a camera close-up where he said the ongoing litigation made it hard to develop trust and to negotiate. [The District’s consistent message to BCS is to “drop the litigation, then things would go so much better.” Lalahpolitico: But that’s not been BCS’s experience in the no litigation years and low litigation years 2000 to 2008.]
The flip charts at the Subcommittee meeting – Public Input Items were recorded
Goines went on to describe the laborious 5 month process to develop the 2013-14 offer. The board well understood that BCS actually wanted 250 kids at BCS. The process involved hundreds of people – parents and taxpayers making public comment or sending email comments. He said BCS did not supply enough data for the board to “get comfortable” with their original proposal. What days, what recess times, what closing times… what would be the community impact? They received only a general description of the program. “With more detail, perhaps which you will provide us tonight and at the next meeting, we will be in a better position to find ways to balance the interests and meet everyone’s needs.” [sic and adjust restrictions]
What days, what recess times, what closing times… what would be the community impact of 26 more students at Blach?
Goines answered Hurd’s question,”Why the complete barring of k-3 students?” There is an issue with shared spaces he said. Unlike BCS at Egan and unlike the 2002 temporary camp, the 2013-14 BCS at Blach Final Offer does NOT have dedicated multi-purpose rooms, fields and such; the district did not want to duplicate the cost of that. In contrast, the 2002 temporary camp had facility separation; k-6 had their own fenced-in area in at that time. This year, to accommodate BCS younger children we would have had to allocate more land so those younger students could have non-shared facilities. We were not sure we could allocate more land so we could meet reasonably equivalent per student standards.
the 2002 temporary camp at Blach had facility separation; k-6 had their own fenced-in area in at that time, but the final offer at Blach has facility sharing
Also Goines worried about the health and safety of BCS k-3 graders when at Blach. He said those grades needed little tyke bathrooms. [ Andrea Eyrling soon sent a text message to Hurd and Phelps that standard bathroom modules for schools, like the ones Los Altos School District just installed at BCS at Blach, all have tall and short urinals.] He said smaller furnishings would be needed. [Andrea Eyrling sent a message that the tables installed at BCS at Blach are height adjustable and can be lowered for K. Furthermore, BCS said it would furnish any themselves.]
LASD did not plan for little tyke bathrooms, smaller furnishings? BCS says it’s done
Goines said that smaller kids have trouble mixing on the playground. In fact the difficulty of integrating older kids with younger is why the Los Altos School District schools don’t integrate them . [Lalahpolitico: He seemed to say that at Los Altos School District schools k-3 and 4-6 had different, segregated recess periods.]
However, because Los Altos School District is considering 6th grade integration at its junior highs, it was deemed ok by the LASD board for BCS 6th graders to be ‘exposed’ to Blach 7 & 8 graders. But for k-3 graders at Blach there would definitely have to be a separate preferably fenced area and play structure to protect the BCS youngsters from the Blach 7&8 graders. [Lalahpolitico: Goines seems to imply that Blach 12 to 14 year-olds are kind of scary and bad actors when it comes to vulnerable little kids!? Or was it the little kids who would harass the big kids?]
Goines said that smaller kids have trouble mixing on the playground.
Hurd offered a recap — There are shared space issues with an emphasis on safety, especially mixing of older and younger students. No District schools are configured for older and younger kids mixing.
“We have a limited space to offer without running into the reasonably equivalent requirements,” said Goines. “The various court cases make us want to make sure we are allocating space fairly. … I’m not against it [sic changes]… How would you propose solving it, knowing that we have a limited amount of space to allocate in the playgrounds on a shared basis?… How would you solve it to make k-3 graders be safe all day? … It’s harder to come up with an answer when you are moving children between campuses. … Without more data we can’t do a proper Prop 39 reasonably equivalent analysis, much the less address community issues like traffic…”
We have a limited space to offer without running into the reasonably equivalent requirements, said Goines. The various court cases make us want to make sure we are allocating space fairly.
Taglio said the 2002 temporary camp facilities would not pass a Prop 39 reasonably equivalent test today.
Goines said, “We are not required to build new facilities, if we don’t have to. We don’t have a k-8 program. We wanted to optimize the space for you, but frankly minimize our expenses. To build duplicate facilities at Egan and Blach seemed like an extravagant expense. We went down a narrow path of straight and simple. We understood how that would work. That doesn’t mean we can’t reopen it “
The BCS area on Blach (brown portable) is hardly visible on Blach. ( photo August 6)
Phelps, “We made a compromise in February. The first part of it was that we accepted the split site. The second part was that we needed our k-8 program to work… All we are talking about is not 500 kids, but just a max of 175 on a rotation basis”
BCS Phelps said, “We made a compromise in February. The first part of it was that we accepted the split site. The second part was that we needed our k-8 program to work… with a max of 175″
Goines, “The 250 was not working for us. We had public comment. The 175 number you mention, is the first I’ve heard.”
Phelps said it was in a letter he should have. “In the spirit of that compromise, we are looking for some support for the burden we have taken on. We have the burden of splitting our families across two sites. Not a single district student has needed to be relocated. That might mean a little readjustment. But most of what is needed is there at Blach. We simply need to be allowed to have access. ..If 600 were safe there before, we should be able to do it with 175 now.”
BCS Phelps said, “…what is needed is there at Blach. We simply need to be allowed to have access…If 600 were safe there before [in the 2001 camp], we should be able to do it with 175 now..”
Goines, “ I’m not saying we can’t [sic have 175 kids there safely].” But we need specific details.
Goines Asks for Detailed Data
After some considerable back and forth, Goines asked for a detailed table that showed for each week, the number of BCS kids in three buckets k-3, 4-6, 7&8. That should be the maximum number (though the average might be ok). That would relate to the planned BCS start and stop times. BCS 7&8 starts at 8:00 and leaves at 3:30. BCS k-6 starts at 8:45 and ends at 2:30. Phelps and Hurd made the point there is not coming and going in the middle of the day.
Taglio talked about the Blach start time being 8:30 and that 15 minute spacing to 8:45 might not be enough. It was pointed out that Blach had changed its start time to 8:30 “to accommodate BCS.” [Lalahpolitico – It might have been in part for BCS’s sake, but it might also have been to try something different in response to well-known traffic congestion patterns, and to let the district kids get a bit more sleep! Obviously 500 Blach student converging on Blach just before 8:30 is the big effect.] Taglio worried about “ripples” that arrival and departures might cause. [Lalahpolitico: As in the Butterfly effect? A 5th grader car slows and turns into the Stepping Stones at 8:40, and a nearby resident has to wait for an extra light cycle at Grant and Covington light?]
BCS want to build a play structure at its own expense on “dead space” at Blach.
Phelps wanted to discuss where BCS could locate a play structure it would pay for itself. Goines said the issue would be how much space it consumed of the Prop 39 equivalency. Hurd offered that there could be a delineated boundary to keep k-3 safe but that it need not be a fence. At Egan, a yellow line now marks the majority of the boundary between Egan land and BCS land. {Lalahpolitico: Last year it used to be a 3 foot fence the whole way}
Goines said k-3 does not now have access to special rooms science, drama and other rooms. That’s where we are now. What is it you would want?
Goines asked, “How would spaces designed for 7&8 graders work for k-3 kids? You need to specific about it. “
Phelps, “If we said no k-3 in shared space, could we put 4-8 in shared space.?” Goines said he could not give a green light for 4 and 5. We have a board member who resisted allowing 6 grader on Blach. Goines said, on a room by room basis, how would each grade use it? You need to tell us that. Then our board might be comfortable.
BCS Phelps, “If we said no k-3 in shared space, could we put 4-8 in shared space.?” Goines said he could not give a green light for grades 4 and 5 using shared space. Board member Doug Smith had resisted letting even the BCS sixth grade use the shared Blach space.
Selected Public Speakers
Phil Aaronson. I want to remind the board that the purpose of a charter school is to be different. To do things differently, maybe to do something new. There was some resistance to that earlier. [ Lahlapolitico: A history reminder. The district denied BCS a charter twice. In the late 90’s the district ignored Los Altos parents who wanted the district to add Mandarin language immersion. In 2005 Grace Mah almost launched a charter school in the Palo Alto District over the same issue, but the board there added the immersion program, nipping the charter sentiment in the bud. ]
In the past the board has not been very supportive of charter school differences. The charters school emphasized drama and public speaking and to this day the district never provided a Multipurpose room. When the charter added foreign language, the district did not provide classrooms for that. I know that you are not legally required to, then again you are not required NOT TO either. Now that the charter school does have a k-8 program, it does appear that you are hell-bent on erasing what is in effect a difference. The point is to create an alternative program. Not to create an Los Altos School District program II that is just like the first one.
As for the process we are going though here, Mr Taglio mentioned that we are only talking about 12% of the district. When we went through the very public process of dismissing options, we went through option of switching Santa Rita and BCS. Right so the Santa Ritans came out and were very vocal about not wanting to be switched to the camp site. Santa Rita is 12% of the district too. It appeared that you listened to them very carefully and that option was taken off the table very quickly. 12% of the district is a substantial amount. In some case the numbers are even smaller. Recently you decided to not offer geometry. We are talking about 30 or 40 kids that would be impacted by that. That is a very small percentage minority. Parents came out. They spoke to you. And you changed your mind.
Please afford us the same courtesy you have afford other small groups, like 12% of the district.
At Covington, Martha McClatchie (BCS), Elena Shea (PTA), unknown, Joe Seither ( LASD & Huttlinger Alliance)
Martha McClatchie
I would like to point out that the BCS parents have done a great job of getting together and carpooling and riding bikes to school. I think that is a large benefit to our share community.
Note: The Blach PTA sent welcome flowers to the BCS teachers and students on the first day of school.
SUMMARY (same as at top)
BCS asked for up to 175 students rather than 145 to be permitted at Blach, to stop barring k-3 grades from setting foot on Blach, to permit 4&5 graders to use most of the shared Blach special rooms, and to allow BCS to build a play structure at BCS expense on some “dead space.” Goines sounded some positive notes with undertones of “gotchas.” It could perhaps be done safely he said. But BCS needed to provide more detailed week by week, by grade level occupancy headcount and room use plans on a room-by-room basis. In that way, the LASD board could 1) calculate and understand the Prop 39 reasonable equivalence of the changes and 2) could “get comfortable” with the safety of proposed changes. Taglio seemed to sound some additional cautionary notes, worrying about ripple effects in the school and broader community of more students arriving and departing.
