That still doesn’t feel good, I know.

What I am hearing is that Crocker does not have an influx of Lakeview students and the demographics of Crocker remains the same. Is that a good thing?

I am curious about the amount of consultant money that was spent to support the school closure efforts- does anyone know?

I also wonder why families did not ask these questions when Montes was having the community meetings. There was no hidden agenda.

The fact of the matter is that Cleveland’s underenrollment problem and Crocker’s overenrollment problem could have been completely avoided had anyone spent the time and diligence to realize that Crocker was already full. Wasn’t one of the most important considerations in redirecting the Lakeview students that they be given a better option than where they were? All four schools receiving students from Lakeview were deemed to be better, but how is doubling the number of homes in the Crocker boundary, thereby potentially halving someone’s chance of getting in there, providing them with a better solution?

OUSD has once again successfully evaded common sense.

That some people are celebrating is absolutely sickening. They are so wound up in their political position or personal vendetta, that they don’t see the school’s status for what it is:

The students and families of Oakland lose with this school closing. I know the board feels it has given chances and is compelled to act. But undoubtedly they are doing this with heavy hearts. Kids have thrived at these schools. Amid all the charges and allegations, political pandering, and factional bickering, there have always been students from this school who have been wildly successful despite difficult backgrounds.

That people are expressing excitement about this school closing is sickening. When a high performing school closes, we all lose.

Just looking at the reaction of the constituencies is sobering and sickening. OEA, for one, owuld be wise to simply stay out of it. No public comments. No open signs of celebration. No chatter in the board mtg hallways about “We finally got his butt…” It is not in your best interest to celebrate the unraveling of something that many families feel connected and whose students have done so well. A few unwise members speaking ignorantly in the hallway, oblivious to media and reporters around them, can really end badly.

If teachers and administrators took an extra hundred million dollars out of Oakland coffers, but turned all of their schools into high performing schools where 95% of the kids went to college and thrived…. would Oakland’s citizens go for it? I can’t speak for all of Oakland, but I bet the answer would be “Yes”. Talk about the impact on crime, health, economics, property values, city services, poverty, and culture!! We paid at least that much for the Raiders.

I’m not saying Chavis did what is alleged, but I do know it’s sad to think of closing down a high performing school.I also think his schools were threatening to others because of test scores, enrollment, expansion, and their pilosophy making a mockery of the traditional company lines for underperformance.

I don’t begrudge the Board members who voted “no”. They are, I assume, considering the best interest of the kids. That’s their job. When the district is losing 8 million in special ed, it must be infuriating to have to shut down greatschools becuase of 2 or 3 million dollars alleged to be misappropriated by an individual.

File charges vs him, if you must, leave the school alone. Better yet, thank him for his service and pick his brain about how he got the schools to improve, then send him on his way after reaching an agreement to pay back whatever he is alleged to have taken.

The closing of quality schools really is unfortunate.
The CELEBRATION of the schools closing is sickening.

Yes

2. I see nothing wrong with people moving to an area becuase the neighborhood school is good. People have common sense and make decisions based on what’s best for their family – including property value. Idealism aside, regular people do what they feel is best for their families. Property values matter. local economies matter. Frankly, people look at the cost of private school tuition and factor it into the mortgage payment they are willing to pay based on the qualiy of their local school.

3. Seems to me that all of this shuffling is a result of the closing of schools. Was this mapped out ahead of time? Did anyone consider the possibility that the students and families would NOT go where they were assigned? Anybody? Were there any voices focusing on the system impact of that possibility – including consolidations?

4. The board went through a pressure cooker last year. After listening to all the weeping and wailing from families at closing schools last year, its unreasonable to think they would bend to the crocodile tears from parents of a couple impacted classrooms this year. Interestingly enough, some of the parents and communities that remained silent last year are impacted this year and are trying to rally a public (and board) that’s tired of fighting. School comunities must learn that they can’t be silent while something unseemly is happening in another part of town.

5. The OEA and OUSD gave initial proposals for a new contract. Do they have to renew? There should be an overarching agreement, but free agency should be built in as well. After a certain number of years, people ought to be able to seek employment and seek a higher salary from schools. Let them bid. People will pay BIG money for a great teacher. There should be a veteran minimum. Think of it as the NFL. Union with free agency. Rest in Peace, Gene Upshaw – a union leader with courage and conviction.

Of course principals do not teach students to read but they will now, thanks to the VRP, be assigned to learn how to enter electronically data on disciplined students. There will be 21 required items for each student disciplined.

#1 the name, identification number, race, ethnicity, sex, age, disability and/or English Language Learner (ELL) status, homeless or foster care status, as applicable, and grade level of each student referred for discipline.

#15 I believe will be subject to bargaining even though the agreement was made with the Federal Government.

#15: The staff member who assigned the penalty/sanction (by staff employee number).

#21: Whether the student was given access to appropriate due process procedures in connection with the penalty/sanction, including but not limited to being given the opportunity to present his or her version of events and/or an explanation for their conduct prior to the imposition of sanctions, and whether, when and how their parents were contacted in connection with each referral incident.

You may not be interested in what principals and teachers are to do under the VRP agreement but do take notice of the agreement to but financing of the plan as a budget line item. And, it will take big bucks to pay for all the in-services and the agreed to “experts” to consult on evaluation of the District’s effectiveness in ending the District’s policies of discrimination.

Remember this plan was negotiated between OCR and Superintendent Smith and his staff without teachers or rincipals or parents involvement of a top down plan. Now if it doesn’t work and makes discipline problems worse it will not be the Feds fault, not the Superintendent’s fault but the schools’ principals and teachers. What a revolting situation the School Board voted to put its principals and teachers in not to mention a budget that can’t afford the plan.

Jim Mordecai

Once again we see public education involved in an activity that has nothing to do with teaching Johnny how to read.

This one is particularly offensive.