We are writing to commend HUSD Board Member Maribel Heredia for her passionate advocacy on behalf of all California public school students during the week of February 7-11th in Washington D.C. Since 2007—well before she was elected to the HUSD Board—Ms. Heredia has been a plaintiff in the Renee v. Duncan lawsuit, a suit to enforce the “highly qualified teacher” provisions of No Child Left Behind. She is represented in this suit, free of charge, by the nonprofit civil rights organization Public Advocates.

At the request of Public Advocates, Ms. Heredia joined Public Advocates Managing Attorney John Affeldt in over a dozen meetings over four days with members of Congress and/or their staff and the Obama Administration to discuss the effect of current federal education laws related to the definition of the term “highly qualified teacher,” the equitable distribution of such teachers, and the rights of parents to know the qualifications of their child’s teacher. In meetings with Congressional leaders—including Senator Tom Harkin, Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and Congressman George Miller, Ranking Member of the House Education and Labor Committee, Ms. Heredia brought an invaluable perspective as a parent and school board member, contributing in a meaningful way to the national dialogue now taking place around ESEA reauthorization.

Through her advocacy, Ms. Heredia won the deep respect of members of a coalition of over 70 civil rights, disability, parent, student and education organizations who have come together to oppose an amendment passed in December watering down the definition of the term “highly qualified teacher” and to advocate for a fully-prepared and effective for all students as part of the ESEA reauthorization. This coalition includes the NAACP, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, LULAC, the National Education Association, the American Federation of Teachers, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, the Council for Exceptional Children, the National Center for Learning Disabilities, American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education, and a number of California-based grassroots parent and student groups. Members of this coalition joined Ms. Heredia and Mr. Affeldt for many of the meetings, and, in the process, learned of the successes and challenges faced by a mid-sized urban school district like Hayward in working to ensure all students are taught by fully-prepared and effective teachers. Throughout, Ms. Heredia represented HUSD in a positive and impressive manner.

We first met Ms. Heredia four years ago in her role as one of the leaders in a campaign to ensure that HUSD students had access to clean, safe, school facilities, sufficient instructional materials, and qualified teachers—rights they are entitled to under the Williams v. California settlement. Ms. Heredia’s advocacy in Washington D.C. this month was a continuation of her passionate leadership on behalf of the rights of all students—and especially the neediest students—to a quality education, as well as the need for all parents to get involved in the struggle to improve our public schools. We understand it was this type of leadership that won her the respect of many members of the HUSD school community and is among the reasons she was elected to the school board.

Thus, it came as a surprise to us that Ms. Heredia has been criticized by some for missing the most recent school board meeting due to her trip to Washington (a trip—to be clear— that was fully funded by Public Advocates; no HUSD funds were used.) While we invited her because she is a plaintiff in the Renee v. Duncan suit, Ms. Heredia was a tireless advocate for the rights of all students to be taught by a fully-prepared and effective teacher, and for the rights of all parents to have full disclosure when their child is being taught by a teacher who is not fully-credentialed. Her advocacy in Washington D.C. will benefit both the students of HUSD as well as students across California and the country.

Thank you, Ms. Heredia.

Re: Ringtones. I used to have the theme from “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly,” which always made it sound like something major was going down when I got a call.

There you go!

In two full days since post of #35 above, not a single response by anyone who reads the Hayword Blog.

Aside from the above reported information at #35, the next biggest problem which I rank as the second, is the failure, over a 20 + year existence of the truancy problem, is not the City’s or the school district’s problem but the failure of the electorate to directly involve itself in constructive (as opposed to destructive) contributions to a solution.

By involvement, I mean active appearance at public comment opportunity or letters to the editor at which opportunities, members of a community offers it’s self in active. personal involvement. Not just picayune complaints but active involvement as a volunteer.

The third problem arises with the coverage, in the print media, which exacerbates that which is described in #35 above.

The review excels in reporting squibs of information dealing with the crimes committed in Hayward. There is no investigative reporting anymore. Staff is stretched pretty thin. Is that due to low subscription rates by local citizenry?

Prudent home buyers, when considering a home purchase are thought heavily influenced by what they read in newsprint available in a city. What do we have in Hayward if not poor business decisions involving the owners of the Review?

How so? Well ask yourself this question: Why is it that all the sorry news about Hayward, as easily observed in the Review, is pretty much limited to ‘squibs’ of data pertaining to crime! Why?? How does that aid the image of our City?

It is all well and good to have some activity occurring with space in commercial rental property devoted to art and history, but is that what prospective home buyers are really seeking when considering a purchase?

In ‘days gone bye’ considerable attention to the ‘quality’ amenities were of the greatest importance over and above price and amenity of the home itself.

That is why, in City of Cupertino, where the school district was ranked somewhere within the top ten in the state, a tract of ‘cookie cutter’ homes, in a large development, which was almost divided in half by the separate school districts ( Cupertino and San Jose,) the same floor plan, built by the single developer, saw a sale of a home in Cupertino which sold for 5 to 10% more than the same model found sold, within a period of two or three weeks, as the one located in San Jose…. the kicker was that the San Jose Home had a fully functional swim pool not found at the Cupertino sale.

Do not place all the blame for our trouble on either the school district nor the City…… Remember the famous comic strip “POGO” ?

I do! I vividly recall the famous remark by Pogo,”we have met the enemy and they is us!”

No re-actions, testy comemment etc. to #35 under Kurhi’s topic ” New HUSD Website –2 – 9 meeting…..

????

In two recent attempts to correspond with HUSD Trustees, written in late January in first instance and at the end of the first week of February, in the second, I attempted communication of fact that the money crisis, caused by the truancy problem, is solvable and that a ‘tough attitude’ ought be exercised by an ‘attention getting’ use of California’s Senate Bill 1317.

That law, applicable to negligent parents, offers use of prison sentences of up to a year, when parents persist in failure to assure attendance of their offspring in classrooms, as mandated by law.

The State, does not forward to HUSD, any average daily attendance money for days at which there is an absence by a student and is almost as culpable, when it keeps the money as solution to it’s own need. Especially in view of the apparent neglect of an issue raised by HUSD Trustee Lisa Brunner, when she provided written reply to my letter dated January 27, 2011

I was surprised as well as pleased that Ms. Brunner took the time from her busy day to write a reply. It was the first written response to any of the many that I have placed before HUSD Trustees.

Ms. Brunner indicates that use of SB 1317 would be inappropriate in view of the efforts being made by HUSD to seek solutions less harsh then SB 1317. In addition, Ms. Brunner stated that ‘implementation of intervention programs‘, as well as a process not yet established, addresses the fact that the new law is incapable of being implemented since required processes are yet to be decided..

Taxpayers, such as myself, are wondering how the time between passage of the law, (early August 2010) and the date it was to become effective ( Jan. 1, 2011), was spent if the required programs are yet to be devised, as stated in her January letter, .

In my letter to Trustees dated February 8, 2011, I pointed to the culpability of the City of Hayward in failure in dealing with scofflaws, who when creating ‘improvements’ to a home, fail to ‘pull a permit’ from City Hall. The purpose of avoiding that permit process is to avoid increase in real property taxes triggered by improvements which add value, as allowed by Prop. 13.

The reality of the incredible numbers of scoff law activity, which avoid County Assessor’s opportunity to add value additions, under the rules of Prop 13, is that frequent use of inexperienced labor, using poor quality materials and ignorance of health and safety codes governing construction, results in undesired creation of additional low income housing over and above the imposition of ABAG’s low income housing quotas.

City of Hayward embraces ABAG quotas while Cities such as Pleasanton are villainous in their refusal to provide their fair share of such housing.

Incorporated in the early 1850’s, City of Oakland has more than it’s fair share of old housing seen as being low income type while Hayward, a city since 1875 also has ample share.

The consequence is that paroled felons, when released with or with out supervision, flock to our older Cities and that has negative consequences at school classrooms.

HUSD ought demand of City and County, rectification of the imbalance which is basic to the attendance problem.

wow !

WHAT IS YUR NEED TO KNOW OF ALL DETAILS PRIOR TO THE ACTUAL SEARCH?

KEEPING THE ‘CARDS’ CLOSE TO THEMSELVES IS CRUCIAL TO NEGOTIATIONS,

LESS THAN THAT, THEY RUN INTO USELESS OBJECTIONS PUT FORWARD BY YOURSELF.

YOU WANT A VOICE IN THOSE DECISIONS? tHEN RUN FOR OFFICE AT NEXT ELECTION OPPORTUNITY !