SUBMITTED BY KATE BOWEN

To the Davis Joint Unified School District Board of Trustees:

My brothers and I attended Emerson Junior High School. My husband’s three children graduated from Emerson Junior High School. Our son, Spencer, is the current Student Body President at Emerson Junior High School. Our family has a long history with Emerson Junior High School.

I thoroughly understand the difficult decisions the Board of Education faces for the upcoming school year. I also understand the possibility that the Board will vote to close Emerson, redirecting students to Holmes and Harper Junior Highs. This would be a devastating blow to the students and the staff who have worked tirelessly for years in less than ideal conditions to develop a strong academic program and a sense of community among students, teachers, and staff members.

After reviewing the five options before the board, I would like to offer an additional alternative to those proposals – an alternative that requires both vision and courage. This proposal should be considered if you are to truly examine all options before making a decision of such monumental proportion or in the words of our superintendent, “The Davis Joint Unified School District is committed to making you a partner in these decisions by giving the facts you need.”

I have long been a proponent of the four-year high school design and a middle school format for children. Research has long suggested that a four-year high school is better for students academically and socially. A middle school model is also considered desirable over current 7th -9th grade junior high model, allowing students to retain “core” teachers for key subjects, while providing additional courses for electives. Davis is one of only a handful of districts in the entire state with the 7th-, 8th-, 9th- grade junior high model.

I would like to see the Board examine the possibility of establishing two four-year high schools in Davis beginning in the 2009-2010 school year, each with approximately 1200 students – Davis Senior High School and Harper Senior High School. Emerson and Holmes could be used as 7th- and 8th- grade campuses, creating a manageable number of students at each site. Ninth graders would benefit from the academic programs offered at the high school, eliminating the numbers of children who already travel to the high school for classes and athletics, and 7th- and 8th graders would have the opportunity to refine their academic skills before entering the time “when it counts” for grades. In addition, a smaller school setting would give students “an increasingly more positive attitude toward school.” (Thomas B. Gregory and Gerald R. Smith, 1987.) Small schools also “allow greater student participation in extracurricular activities.” (James M. Kearney, 1994)

No one wants to close a school, especially without careful examination of the consequences. To close Emerson this year, would result in two overcrowded junior high campuses (which we have experienced without success in the past), unhappy school families in West Davis, transportation and safety issues for 11, 12, 13, and 14 year-olds, and displaced staff members who are already stretched emotionally and professionally. Harper was originally envisioned as an eventual second high school campus. Let’s use Harper as a high school, with the goal of developing two smaller high schools to better serve our students. Then, during the next school years the best minds in Davis could address the details of sports teams, musical groups, and activities at the two schools.

Please take the time to consider this option before making your decision. It would be a bold choice – one that requires vision and courage. It’s time to move forward, not back to the overcrowding we worked so hard to dismiss in the late 1990s.

Closing Emerson at this time would be a hasty decision with long-term implications – a decision that once made, could never be reversed. I encourage the Board to slow down this process, to make the best decision for all of our students.

Finally, in the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson, our school’s namesake, “To map out a course of action and follow it to an end requires courage.” I challenge the Board to have that courage and do the right thing. You owe it to the population of West Davis to seriously consider options that will keep Emerson Junior High’s spirit alive for generations to come.

SUBMITTED BY TIM FAHLEN - OPTION H?

I think the following is the best option of all – care to reply to it with feedback?

Option H, or a modified version of it:

DHS 9-12
DVHS 9-12 at Harper or remain next to DHS?
Harper becomes new home to DVHS or another high school?
Holmes and Emerson Middle Schools 7-8 only
DSIS to Harper/Holmes/or Emerson?
District offices to Harper or Valley Oak?


Alright, I too believe that 9-12 is good for the high school, especially for programs.

DaVinci, with the addition of a 9th grade class, could use a science classroom at Davis High, or if they move to Harper, may use a science classroom (won’t have to spend $384,200 on a science portable) there that meets high school science lab specs.

If DaVinci remains next to DHS, then boundaries should be drawn so that there are close to equal numbers at DHS/DaVinci and Harper High School. My guess is that this would be too expensive in terms of teachers; maybe the two high schools would be too under populated for the 2008/2009 school year.

Alternatively, if DaVinci 9-12 moves to Harper, it can grow and potentially become a second traditional high school in the future, when DHS gets too big. Adding DSIS and/or the district offices to Harper (or any secondary school to reduce an administrator) saves $120,000, the cost of one site administrator, and it frees up the current district office buildings.

Holmes and Emerson should become 7th and 8th grade middle schools only. Among the current secondary schools, they are the best geographically situated ones (Holmes and Harper are too close to each other with respect to how far West Davis students are to Holmes) in town, concerning the safety of 12 and 13 year old children. With about 675 students at each of the two middle schools, the enrollment will be proper for the preservation of electives. And, when it’s most appropriate and affordable, Emerson can be repaired and modernized.

Lastly, with DSIS and the district offices moved, that property can be sold soon or sometime in the future.

This option seems to be the most cost effective and it would seem to meet the needs of the most community members in the long term.

SUBMITTED BY KATE BOWEN

Trustees,

Here is another scenario for you consideration:

1. Assuming Davis High is 9 – 12 (Great academic benefits, but outreach needed to work with neighbors about increased traffic, vandalism, trash, etc. Consider exploring the possibility of closed campus and working with local food providers to get food on campus. Dixon High has just gone through this transition this year and are having great results. Kids only grumbled for a couple of months.)
2. Assuming that DaVinci moves to Valley Oak (since legwork has already been done there with Sac City outreach)
3. Assuming that Emerson becomes a “smaller school” with 7th and 8th graders, retaining great programs
4. Consider moving DSIS to Emerson – possible benefits include:

a. One principal for site
b. Teacher leader for DSIS
c. One counselor for all students
d. Shared facilities (new computer lab at Emerson, library would not have to move, ample parking)
e. Shared support staff (office, custodial, etc.)
f. Gives DSIS a venue for events
g. DSIS students in 7th and 8th could be invited to participate in school events, teams, and clubs

Thank you for the work you do on behalf of our students.

Kate Bowen
24-year veteran teacher
Emerson parent

SUBMITTED BY DAVE PHILLIPS

Dear Board of Education:

Some late night/early morning thoughts regarding the Board meeting last night, offered with thanks for the difficult job you are doing.

1. Please consider a modified Option G. My suggestion is to move DaVinci, not to Emerson, but to Harper. My understanding from helping plan the science facilities there is that they are already high school grade facilities. Thus, no science portable would be needed, saving about $400,000 in facilities money and the need to rush far-reaching decisions to meet a deadline for ordering a portable. The ongoing savings would be the same as in Option G, plus an extra $10-15,000 not needed for moving Emerson staff and their stuff (I think that is a very low estimate by the way). You would need to move boundaries to balance junior high attendance.

2. Concerns about cutting a facility (Emerson) vs programs. Although I live near Emerson and teach there, this is not just about "don't cut me." I support the neighborhood schools philosophy in place in the district, and preserving that principle is worth some number of dollars.
"Programs" would be affected by closing Emerson. It has a unique set of programs and these would become extinct. More importantly, packing close to 1000 kids into the remaining two junior highs may look good on paper in terms of programs, but as I teacher I have seen the difference in kids' readiness and ability to approach a program when they have spent the day jostled in the halls, waiting in the lunch line for 25 minutes of a 30 minute lunch, etc.-they arrive in class not as ready to learn. There will be a cost to programs either way; it is just hard to put a
dollar value on the two junior high option.

There is another practical point that argues for giving the money for Emerson a priority over programs/teachers at this time. There is no other ready source of funding for Emerson, but teachers/programs can be added back as donations and other revenue possibilities come to
light; as I understand it, donations to Davis Schools Foundation cannot be used to keep Emerson open. The money for Emerson needs to be part of the structural, high priority budget.

3. Last, Emerson safety. The district architect said in our staff meeting a few days ago, in the presence of our facilities manager, that Emerson was structurally sound. Surely it will be as structurally safe next year as it is this year and was last year. The statement that
somehow the halls are narrower now than they were when we had almost 1000 students at Emerson just a few years ago is completely inaccurate. I'm not sure what he was thinking of (perhaps the original open plan when the school was first built?), but the implication of an unsafe
place was inaccurate and appalling.

Thank you again for your time and consideration.

SUBMITTED BY ANDREA WEISS

Below is a copy of an email I sent to the School Board members this morning. I think it is critical to begin engaging Holmes, Harper and even Davis High School parents in this issue so the community can unify over the issues as it truly is going to impact everyone!

Here's my email:

Thank you for your time and attention to the Jr. High issue last night. A couple of points I wanted to make:

1. I don't believe people are taking a "just me" approach to the issue. Issues being raised by parents and students about transportation impacts, travel safety, overcrowding, learning environments where students feel a sense of belonging and personal safety, property values across the city, etc. effect our entire community and aren't about "just me".

2. Before you make a decision you MUST determine the actual hard costs/savings. At first glance closing Emerson may look like $600,000 in savings but when you take from that not just the need for portables but also the cost to pay staff over the summer to reconfigure schedules, curriculum, classrooms; the cost of paying security for an abandoned school site, the
cost of solving the transportation issues, and I'm sure a variety of other items that haven't been outlined in Option A what would be the final savings number? That is the real figure you need to know to make a decision about the amount saved if Emerson is closed.

MORE PRESS ON POSSIBLE EMERSON CLOSURE

Sac Bee:

http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/802368.html

Channel 10 website:

http://www.news10.net/display_story.aspx?storyid=39768

Channel 3 website:

http://www.kcra.com/news/15651230/detail.html

Channel 13 website:

http://cbs13.com/local/davis.school.fight.2.681299.html

SAC BEE STORY ON 3/20 BOARD MEETING

Davis schools meeting hears budget, closure options

SUBMITTED BY DAVE PHILLIPS

Letter to the Editor of Davis Enterprise:

We are about to turn over our schools' educational health to accountants and facilities operators. The doctor has said we need to lose some weight quickly, and the business people running this HMO have provided us with drastic options and a week to decide--no time for a second opinion or thoughtful weight loss: Cut off some combination of arm or leg.

They recommend left leg (Emerson) because it is a touch shorter, has some blemishes and would provide a lifetime savings on shoes and polish; the needed artificial leg would not count as an expense because it comes from a different budget line.

I'm sorry, but we need to go back to basics and have our Board of Education decide what we as a school district are to be; then we can ask the business-oriented staff how best to make that happen. We definitely should question the biased budgetary "analysis" presented to the public and board.

For example, listed under "concerns" for maintaining the status quo (i.e., keeping Emerson open), the district has "over 100 junior high school students continue to travel to DHS"; nowhere is mentioned a concern about 500 such students traveling halfway across town to Holmes. Fair and balanced?

As a district, we are best served by three uncrowded, unique junior highs, spread evenly across the city. Can we survive with two packed junior highs? Yes, we did four to five years ago. But we also chose to build a third junior high just to alleviate the same overcrowded, climate-busting conditions we are now proposing to revisit.

As we endeavor to save money, we also need to make sure we spend wisely what we have. The district has estimated a facilities cost of $400,000 to $500,000 just to move portables if Emerson were to be closed. Coincidentally, that is about the cost of buying three new science portables, which would largely take care of modernizing Emerson's science facilities.

Instead of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, perhaps we should start repairing the hole in the hull. Let's start planning now for a modernized Emerson. What lesson are we teaching our children when we just walk away from something that needs fixing?

3/20 STORY ON KXJZ (NPR) - SACRAMENTO

Steve Milne did a report on the possible closure of Emerson on KXJZ (Sacramento's NPR station) on the morning of March 20th. Click HERE to listen to the audio and read a transcript.

P.S. Gee, I wonder where they got that photo...???

3/20 SAC BEE STORY ON "DOLLAR A DAY" CAMPAIGN

"Dollar a day goal in Davis" - Click HERE to read the story.

SUBMITTED BY GARY SLIZESKI

My wife went to Emerson Junior High; the "old" Emerson, that concrete block building sprawling at the prime real estate location of 5th and B. That place has got to be at least 50 years old, I'm guessing. When the new Korematsu Elementary was sitting unused for a year, there was a proposal to move the district offices from the "Old Emerson". It is time to re-visit that idea. Here are some reasons why:

1) It is a lot less disruptive to the educational process to move the district administrative offices, than it is to lay off teachers and re-shuffle the rest among the remaining schools.

2) This idea will buy time for our district to see how the budget crisis plays out. It will also give our community time to step up with creative ideas to save what this well-educated community treasures, such as the music programs, and libraries with librarians.

3) Think in terms of abundance. We have unused and under-utilized resources. Re-establish a Best Use of Land and Facilities Task Force. The Grande Elementary site is like money in the bank, with no use for it in sight, to my knowledge. The Valley Oak site on 8th Street might be well suited as a new location for the District offices. I'm sure local developers could give an estimate of what the land at 5th and B might be worth. Sure seems like a prime location for re-development to me

4) Unlike at the elementary level, no one is claiming we have excess capacity at the Junior High level. All 3 junior highs are still teaching in portables. The reason Harper was built was to relieve crowding at the junior high level. So now it is a good idea to re-establish two 1,000 student junior highs only 2.2 miles apart from each other serving one side of town?

5) Much is made of the expense of modernizing Emerson. Emerson isn't falling down. An architect recently stated it looks structurally sound to him. We have been upgraded over the years. The gym has a beautiful new wood floor. The A/C system of self-contained units works much better than the original central air conditioning system. We just got new carpet, wall board, and paint. The school is quite attractive, with well-established gardens and landscape, and public art created over time.

6) Close the "new" Emerson, and you might as well re-name it the Westside Skateboarding and Climbing Structure. It will take a 24 hour guard to keep it from burning down or having kids falling off the roof.

7) With the construction down-turn, it will be less expensive to accomplish the minimum modernization our school deserves. I heard on the news that Modesto High School is just starting a $14 million modernization because the funds are available from a different part of the state budget. Why do we in Davis think we need to close a school instead? Hire some local contractors and "git 'er done".

8) I've been teaching at Emerson for nearly 20 years. I sense our school is performing at a higher level now than ever. We can't let a perceived "quick fix" to an uncertain budget situation destroy Emerson or the district-wide programs. You've got to look at our API scores, for example. Emerson accomplishes its mission on so many levels with a culture it has taken almost 30 years to develop. For example, what explains the highest test scores with some of our student population choosing to go elsewhere for self-contained GATE? Check out the quality of the Emerson art, athletics, drama, peer helping, band, leadership, recycling, school-wide discipline programs, and entire grade level field trips, among others. There are advantages to being a little smaller.

9) I've decided to support Jamie Boston's long walk. I realized all it would take is for my wife and me to give up the $3 nightly bottle of wine we share, for the approximately 122 days before the 2008-9 school year begins. That amounts to $366 (Leap Year). We will toast to the health and longevity of our Davis teachers, programs, and the "new" Emerson, with tea!

Gary Slizeski
Science Teacher
Emerson Junior High DJUSD

SUBMITTED BY CATHY SACKS

I met with Susan Lovenburg, our school board member, this morning about the closure of Emerson. I left there believing that if the Emerson faculty, parents, and students let the School Board know tonight that we prefer to stay at Emerson even if the facilities are not modernized or repaired in the near future, then they will be convinced to keep our school open another year at least. The School Board Members must know that we feel it is more important to stay together as a community in West Davis, even though the facility is not in the same state as Holmes and Harper. She seemed concerned that the parents and students feel that they are not treated equitably by the current physical state of Emerson. Several parents at the table tried to tell her that we would rather Emerson stay as it is than move to a newer, more modernized junior high on the far side of town. I would like to encourage all staff to stand together at the mic tonight and say that the facilities are not in bad enough condition to be the primary reason used to close the school.

I also learned there are more than 5 options that will be presented tonight. Try to access a copy of all the options. One is to bring DaVinci to Emerson.

SUBMITTED BY JACKIE RUTHEISER

Dear friends,

Please remember that our school board members do not like making these decisions and had no idea they would have to be in this position when they ran for office. They just thought they would be able to help make our schools better not worse when they chose to run for school board. They will have to make many unpopular, decisive and hurtful decisions and even though they chose to lead - they thought it would be fun to help make Davis schools better - not this mess they find themselves in.

Therefore, we need to make sure they understand that as a community, we will not let the Davis schools deteriorate just because the State is cutting our budget.

Now is the time to LEAD!! We need to let the school board know that the Davis community is totally committed to raising the 3 million by May 15th and each and every one of us who speaks needs to solidly pledge to support and volunteer in any way possible to pass a November ballot $200 parcel tax. Why? Because the school board members are afraid to ask for a parcel tax. Except for Richard Harris, I don't believe any of them has stepped up to the plate to lead on the revenue issue because they don't think it's their job! They see their job as just implementing the cuts (and of course, in order to avoid being taken over by the Yolo County Board of Education, they needed to propose those cuts).

However, if we let them know that we will support increasing revenues - it will give them the COURAGE and HOPE to pursue these options. And if they think that the community will support a long-term solution, they might be inclined to make decisions that do not hurt all of us longterm.

The school board isn't the problem - it's REVENUES!!

If the state legislature passes tax increases this fall and saves the schools, then GREAT! But that won't happen to save our situation now and more importantly, we just cannot rely on the State to make that happen because unlike 47 other states, California requires a 2/3rds vote to pass tax measures and state budgets and that will be very difficult.

If the State does pass a tax increase sometime this fall - GREAT AGAIN - more money for Davis. We still would get our fair share, regardless if we pass a parcel tax in November (we missed the deadline to get on the June ballot).

We cannot just ask, beg, demonstrate and plead our cases tonight - we must promote permanent solutions.

SUBMITTED BY KATHY KOBLIK

Letter to Board of Education and Superintendent:

Dear Fellow Davis Joint Unified Stakeholders,

Thank you for your care, time, energy, and stamina, taking leadership roles in these difficult times.

By now, you certainly have heard from various sources about drawbacks to the closure of Emerson. Perhaps you’ve logged more persuasive essay reading than I have! Programs on the chopping block are all valuable and you are juggling the needs of all the students in the District. I’m not going to reiterate Tim Fahlen’s letter or the PTA’s letter to you. I simply felt duty bound to make a reminder.

Although severe cuts will cost us talented, dedicated, energetic, visionary young teachers – and I join you in mourning this – two of the cuts will most certainly have permanent effects and so I ask you to think especially hard about those cuts. Before we commit to permanent cuts, let’s make sure that the budget is that dire.

One of these cuts is Emerson. Once this decision is made, undoing the decision would be costly and difficult. From the District Offices scenarios, it looks like a secondary school reorganization is being suggested. This is a large task to accomplish well in a short amount of time. The other permanent decision is to forgo the State money that is offered for ninth grade reduction. I understand that once we pass these funds up, we cannot get them back (my information comes from what I feel is a reliable source, but I’m not conversant personally with this funding source law). Although I might not argue that in budget crunch times a 20 to 1 ratio for ninth grade students in these core subjects is a necessity, it is certainly a wonderful program that offers advantages to students. We get three teachers for the price of one with this program (since the State funds 2/3 of reduction), so that seems to maximize our money.

My nightmare (and probably yours too) is that five years down the road we will be saying: “Why on earth did we do that?”

Best wishes for the wisdom and stamina to do this job – and I also hope that you all have some joy, peace, and even frivolity in your life during this challenging Spring.

Sincerely,

Kathy Koblik
English Teacher
Emerson Junior High School

SUBMITTED BY KELLY WILKERSON

First, raise $3 million through the Foundation to get through this next year; then, try to get a parcel tax on the ballot in November for a long term solution. The important thing is to save programs in the short term. If we fire all of our elementary and junior high librarians...all of that institutional knowledge will be lost. So, even if we do hire more librarians a year later, our libraries will take many years to recover. Firing 14 secondary English teacher means no more class size reduction in 9th and 10th grade English. And, as I understand state rules, once we stop offering class size reduction, we cannot get it back. So, that means FOREVER losing smaller class sizes in those grades (the state picks up 2/3 of the cost). Of course, I'm biased because I'm an English teacher...but it seems pretty important to me to know that something we are doing in the short term could have far-ranging consequences for generations of Davis children.

Ummmm....just like closing Emerson.

SUBMITTED BY KATIE HORN

Word has it there are 2 more options being added to the current 5. Both close Emerson and make the HS 9-12. So we now have 6 of 7 closing Emerson, and 5 of 7 turning the HS to a 9-12. I can see where this is headed.....

To make any headway with the board we will need facts/numbers. Folks planning to speak at the board meeting tonight might consider the following topics: (If you see an area that you might be able to tackle, please jump in!)

No one is yet clear on the REAL cost to fix these big problems at Emerson. Any way to find out what that is and share that with the board convincingly?

What are the big facilities problems vs. the small ones that can wait at Emerson?

Maybe pictures and costs spent on recent upgrades of the gym floors, carpets etc. to counter the devistating pictures the board has to review currently.

The REAL savings are still also unclear. $566,000 saved if this facility is closed, but actual savings will vary based on which option is chosen - more security needed for the extra HS kids if that goes 9-12, extra Vice Principals or some other staff depending on where the kids go.... The superintendent couldn't give an actual figure to the board member until he knew what staffing would be requested as a result of the changes.....but it seemed likely that it would be something less than the $566,000.

Once we know the real cost it will come down to programs vs. facility. I think it may be easier to rebuild programs that have taken a hiatus for a year or 2, but very unlikely to reopen a school once it is closed. Let the board know where your preference lies.

The board seems worried about closing the school and angering 1/2 of Davis (the 1/3 that are Emerson folks, and the 1/2 of Holmes that also got moved...) and then having proposed bond measures fail in Nov. If a school or programs have been spared for one year pending the passing of a tax, I think folks will feel more compelled to vote in favor of that tax knowing those things WILL be lost if the tax doesn't pass. If those things have already been taken from us, then it may be quite a bit harder to pass something. It may be helpful to remind the board of this :)

Isn't there also a legal mandate for the district to bus our children if they are being sent to schools outside of the attendance zones though no fault of their own? This, I'm sure, would be extremely costly and should be part of the equation....

Reminding the board of how much we still need to know, and urging them not to vote may be our biggest success right now.

SUBMITTED BY ROBERT SHUMWAY

Response to Superintendent's Message of March 19:

Dr Hammond,

I find your message condescending and once again short-sighted in our overall goal....the education of our children.

You state..."Your participation during board meetings on the 2008-2009 budget and ongoing input in the midst of this budget crisis has been vital." Has been? You mean "will be", right? There hasn't been any ongoing discussion. We just found out about the possibility of an Emerson closure. What we would like is an ongoing discussion to actually consider options and alternatives, and not just a "Thank you for speaking and sending your emails, but we've already made our decision and we don't really care what anybody thinks."

You go on to say "As the board continues to cope with the many important fiscal issues our district is facing, it is paramount that district staff and the trustees are provided ample time to discuss these matters during a reasonable hour. We simply cannot make crucial decisions well after midnight." Are you kidding me!!! If you have to stay up all night working on a solution, you must!! Our kids spend more time finishing school projects and book reports than you are allowing for discussion on the future of education in this town. This is a study session for a final exam, put some effort into it. Everyone who shows up and wants to speak should be heard. If that takes all night, then bring some coffee, but we will be heard. 45 mins? Our rally lasted longer. KCRA Channel 3 listened longer to parents and children than you are giving us at the meeting. I urge the Board President to allow flexibility in the time for all to be heard and not outline "new parameters" as you have noted.

Finally, you ask for our "support as we continue to navigate through the challenges of our state's budget. The fine community volunteers that make up our school board have a vested and strong interest in making the best decisions possible as we strive to keep our district solvent." You support us first!! Give us a reason to support you. Be creative and think outside the box. A solution exists that does not include closing Emerson or any School, you just haven't found it. If the you and the Board listened with an open mind, you would hear those suggestions. You work for us. The Board works for and represents us.

When, we the people, feel we aren't being represented properly and being managed competently, we can replace the Board and a new Board can replace you. Now get to work!!!

Robert Shumway

SAC BEE STORY ON 3/18 RALLY

On March 19, the Sacramento Bee published a story about the rally held on March 18 in Central Park:

Davis parents, students protest school-closure proposal

MARCH 18 RALLY

At 4:00 on Tuesday, March 18, there was a rally at Central Park to urge the Board of Education to save Emerson (and not consolidate into two junior highs). There was a great turnout, and the Davis Schools Foundation had a booth set up to accept donations for its "Dollar a Day" campaign. The group marched around the perimeter of Central Park a couple of times and then across 5th Street to the front entrance of the DJUSD headquarters. THANK YOU to everyone who turned out to show their support! There were students, parents, siblings, teachers and community members representing several schools (including Patwin, Chavez, Emerson, Harper and Da Vinci). It was a community-wide effort and we thank everyone who participated!
Thank you to Superintendent Hammond for appearing at the rally and speaking to the crowd.

SUBMITTED BY EMERSON PTA

Emerson Junior High School
Parent-Teacher Association
2121 Calaveras Street
Davis, CA 95616

March 17, 2008

Chair Allen and Board Members
Davis Joint Unified School District
526 B Street
Davis, CA 95616

Dear Davis School District Board Members,

The Parent-Teacher Association of Emerson Junior High School urges you not to close Emerson. There is so much uncertainty at this time about the final budget figures. The impact to the entire community is huge and the community’s ability to reverse this decision later will be very difficult if not impossible. The School Board is considering five options for addressing junior high school and high school structure and only one would keep Emerson open. All of these options have far-reaching consequences, many that will be unintended and unexpected. Please postpone a decision and provide the opportunity for careful consideration with input by all who could be impacted; don’t make a hasty decision with little opportunity for deliberation and input. After all, this is about our students and doing what is best for them.

We do acknowledge that District staff is working very hard to create options for you and you are working under tight time constraints and that hard decisions have to be made. We request that you postpone this decision. Please give the Davis community more time to provide helpful feedback on how to create additional revenue and reduce expenditures, for the good of all city residents and workers, and most especially all students, for the long term. As Superintendent Hammond said at the March 6 School Board Meeting, once the decision is made to consolidate the junior highs “it’s a point of no return, when we decide to do it.” Such a decision will have a huge, detrimental impact on west Davis homes and families in the short and long term. Harper and Holmes families alike value schools with manageable enrollments, and don’t want their neighborhood junior high schools to have 1,000 children attending them. By the time the March 20, 2008 meeting occurs, the majority of the Davis community will have only known about this huge, long lasting decision for a few weeks.

Please provide a facilitated public workshop to get input from all affected parties before you make a decision. Please keep our options open!

We request that you consider the following information:

Impacts on the Entire Davis Community:

• The positive climate created by the reduced size of the junior highs will be lost to all. Parents, teachers, and administrators who experienced the change since Harper was built found that behavior at all of the junior highs was greatly improved by the opening of Harper and the reduction of crowding at the junior highs.

• Increasing crowding of the junior highs back to what it was before Harper (approximately 1000 students per school) will only lead to increased bullying (and potential costs to the District), kids lost in the system, decreased sense of community, and lost opportunities for students to “shine."

• As you can imagine, a larger population will decrease the attention all junior high students will receive and the offerings that will be available to them. There will be more competition for highly coveted classes, specialty programs, leadership roles, sports, drama, etc. These are some of the reasons a new junior high was added in the first place!

• There is increased danger to students from traveling to east Davis; several hundred students will have to travel beyond biking distance from west Davis to east Davis thereby having a negative impact on neighborhood streets and major arteries such as Anderson, Covell, and F Street.

• The closing of Emerson will increase environmental impacts due to increased travel from west to east Davis. The City of Davis will be impacted as it will have to address traffic, flow, parking, and community transit options. This costs money the City doesn’t have. An environmental study should be completed before such a big decision is made.

• New housing developments are in the works in various places in the city including a large development within the Emerson boundary. We need time to evaluate the best use of school buildings to accommodate our changing community and the funding available. Closing Emerson next year was NOT part of the original plan. It is too soon to make this kind of a decision. Closing Emerson could also result in reduced enrollment as parents seek other options, such as Davis Waldorf School and attending schools outside of Davis.

• Property values in west Davis, in particular, but throughout Davis, will be impacted without a school in west Davis and more crowded schools in east Davis.

• The need to redraw boundaries will impact all three Junior High Schools significantly.

• If Emerson closes, it will likely be vandalized, as with any vacant building, and people will skateboard and climb buildings on the premises, which will result in injuries and destruction. Alternatively, the district may have to pay for a security guard and upkeep.

Features of Emerson:

• Every school in Davis has its unique, special features, and the PTA does not intend to undervalue any school. We would like to note some of the special features of Emerson: Emerson has a state-recognized garden program, highest STAR scores, Peer Helper class, great school art, and Spanish Immersion programs. Emerson is one of the most energy efficient schools in the district. Davis Senior High School’s Grad Night is held at Emerson each year due to its unique layout and to ensure student safety and supervision.

Missing/Inaccurate Information:

• We have been told that Emerson needs to be remodeled and that is why it should closed. We understand though, that while it would be great to have the school remodeled, the cost is unknown, there are insufficient funds for that at this time, and it is not necessary for safety or other reasons for many years. “It is structurally sound” as stated by Steve Newsome, a district contracted architect, at a faculty meeting on February 20, 2008. That is not a good reason to close the school.

• We have been told that Emerson has small rooms and maintenance issues, but the buildings do not make the school, the community – the teachers, students, and administration - make the school. We are content to have an old school when the alternative is to move. Maintenance issues can be addressed for $1 million (with the existing facilities funds) at another time in the future, as stated by Rey Reyes, Director of Maintenance, Operations & Facilities, on March 6 at the School Board’s meeting.

• We have been told that closing Emerson is needed to have a cushion in the budget – but with these lean times, all should share in the burden, not just middle school students and one school community.

• It keeps getting repeated that Emerson has low enrollment so it should close, but the enrollment is a function of attendance boundaries, not a function of Emerson; enrollment boundaries and other changes, such as the new UCD development, will increase and balance enrollment. The enrollment at Emerson should not be the basis for closing the school.

Ways to Reduce Costs:

• It keeps being said that it costs $566,000 (or sometimes $600,000) to keep Emerson open, but it seems that there has been no real analysis of alternatives to that cost, or of ways to save some costs or to spread them over all the schools. Such alternatives include having combined jobs or staff sharing jobs with the other schools, including that all principals and vice-principals could also teach. Also, if you close Emerson there will be ongoing costs of custodians to maintain the school grounds and no accounting is given for that. There are many ways to reduce the amount from $566,000 that do not seem to have been explored. There are also costs that would be added to other schools due to Emerson closing that have not been factored in.

Alternatives to Emerson Closure:

• Postpone the decision:

o The Davis community is committed to supporting the schools and will rally to get the money needed to save the schools.
o Before closing Emerson, with all the unintended and unexpected consequences, wait until there is an opportunity to consider a long-term plan for the schools in Davis. Several options have been proposed, but all would have significant impacts and should be considered in a thought out plan, not just in a few weeks time. We understand that one of the plans may be to shift the ninth graders to high school and turn Harper into a small high school and keep Emerson and Holmes as junior highs. Why not wait to see if that plan or another can be reasonably pursued?

• Leave Emerson open until sufficient funds are actually available to remodel it and there is a plan to deal with all the Davis secondary schools.

• Raise more money: Measure Q, which has been supported since 1983, raises more than $4 million per year. Support and pass a new parcel tax in November. Support new bond measures or additional taxes. Rent space at school sites for Community College classes, like Korematsu is currently doing. Sell the Grande site. Sell the current district office site (perhaps move district offices to Valley Oak). Sell Nugget Field. Improve the district’s attendance (the ADA will remain
the same or improve by keeping schools small).

• Give the legislature a chance to provide some early relief, for example - AB908.

All this being said, if you do choose to close Emerson, we have some special requests: that you keep any changes simple; that you move Emerson students to Holmes, not split them between Holmes and Harper; that you create the opportunity to integrate the special features of Emerson into Holmes; that you balance enrollment at Holmes and Harper so that one school is not burdened with excess enrollment during the transition period; that you allow the students to rechoose electives; that you make sure all transportation alternatives are created; and that you keep all junior high counselors to support these students.

Education Code Section 17387 specifies: “It is the intent of the Legislature to have the community involved before decisions are made about school closure or the use of surplus space, thus avoiding community conflict and assuring building use that is compatible with the community’s needs and desires.”

Please give EVERYBODY in the community a chance to help you before you make a rush decision!

Sincerely,

Frances McChesney & Gustavo Soberano, PTA
Co-Presidents on behalf of the Emerson PTA

cc: Dr. James Hammond, Superintendent

SUBMITTED BY NATALIE PEAUROI

Below is the text of a message we recently sent to the school board members. We hope the entire Davis community will join us in urging the school board to consider all options and all potential ramifications of the proposed closure of Emerson.

School Board Members,

We sent an email expressing concern about the possible closure of Emerson a week ago. Since that time, the likelihood of Emerson’s closure seems to have dramatically increased and, of even greater concern to us, it appears that this decision will potentially be made with virtually no study or public input. We feel that the following questions must be answered before a decision about any possible closures are made:

• Have additional students entering the district from new housing developments not requiring Measure J approval been taken into consideration? Groundbreaking for UCD’s West Village is set to take place THIS year according to the UC Davis web site. This development is anticipated to house 500 faculty/staff members and their families. The development includes a site for an elementary school, but secondary students will need to be absorbed into existing schools. Where will they go if our junior high and high schools are already at maximum enrollment? These students will all be living within a short bike ride of Emerson. What about the new development being planned for the previous Hunt/Wesson site? What are the additional costs the district will incur if a school which is closed down must be reopened after only a few years? Is it wise to use our school facilities funds to add temporary classrooms to one school site when they could be used to renovate another school site?
• How will moving DaVinci High School off site from DHS affect DaVinci enrollment? From personal communication with current DaVinci families, we believe many feel that having the school on the DHS site is an advantage in that it allows students easy access to the wider course offerings at DHS, and also continued close contact with friends at DHS. Have the families at DaVinci been made aware of the possibility that their school will be moved next year? What will the district do if fewer students than expected choose to attend DaVinci if it moves off site?
• Why is it a foregone conclusion that if the district budget can support only two junior high schools, Emerson should be the school to close? A map of Davis indicates that closing Emerson will leave two junior highs on the eastern side of town. Yes, Emerson needs to be modernized. But a bond has already been approved by the voters and money has been set aside by the district for the purpose of modernizing Emerson. Emerson parents have been promised modernization by the district for years. Shouldn’t all three of the junior high schools be considered for possible closure, taking into account not only district cost but also student impact, future growth and possible alternate uses of the sites? Might a more centrally located junior high, very close to DHS and already set up as a secondary school potentially provide a more attractive site for DaVinci and Sac City College?
• What are the district’s responsibilities to provide transportation and/or safe access to students from west Davis to Holmes if Emerson closes? What would the on-going costs of providing transportation be? What about the costs of traffic improvements that may be needed?
• What are the intangible costs and how should they factor in? These costs include the social disruptions to students and potential feelings of not belonging at a very vulnerable time in students’ lives, as well as serious quality of life issues for families who purchased homes within walking distance of a school and now must deal with finding a way to drive their children across town to get them to school. What about the potential damage done to the district by parents losing faith when it appears they have been asked to fund the construction of two new schools only to be told a few years later that neither were needed and older schools on their side of town must close?

We entreat you to please answer these questions and explore every possible option before making a final decision about something so far-reaching as the closure of a school and the potential reorganization of four other schools.

Sincerely,

John and Natalie Peauroi

SUBMITTED BY ROBERT SHUMWAY

Dear Dr. Hammond and DJUSD Board Members,

First off let me be clear in my message, closure of Emerson is unacceptable.

Closure of any Junior High in Davis is irresponsible. The decisions of past and present DJUSD Board Members, demonstrate that Superintendents and their administrations have been negligent in fulfilling their responsibilities for educating our children. It MUST STOP NOW!!

Now is your chance to actually show some leadership and management skills and earn the respect of those who voted you into office and for those of us for who you currently claim to represent. I have three children affected by your decision on whether or not to close Emerson. (One currently enrolled and two in the future) To this date, I have received NO official communication from the DJUSD about the potential closure of Emerson. NO email, NO, postcard or mailing, NO flyer sent home with my children. The only communication has been by word of mouth by the PTAs of the affected schools. Once again, this demonstrates to me a lack of leadership and managerial incompetence. Where is the Committee or Advisory Council seeking community input from parents and educators and studying alternatives to the closure of schools? Your haste in rushing to a decision is another indication of leadership and managerial incompetence.

While the current situation is due, in large part, to poor planning by prior DJUSD Board Members, Superintendents and their administrations, the future lies in your hands. Continuing to make poor decisions maintaining the status quo must stop now.

When I began to talk with friends about the potential closure of Emerson or any Junior High in Davis, I did some research and found the DJUSD Mission as stated on the district website…

“It is the Mission of the Davis Joint Unified School District, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH PARENTS, to provide a quality education program for all students that develops the knowledge, skills, abilities, and values need for our students to reach their full potential.”

How ironic!!!! Less than 12 words into the district’s own Mission Statement is the mention of partnership with parents. Is that just when it’s convenient for the board or as part of an ongoing, continual process? In the same document as the Mission Statement, are the Goals for Davis Schools for the 21^st Century. Eight are listed and the District is failing in six of them. Of course the document was written in 2001, so maybe the lack of an update was the fault of a previous DJUSD Board too. Doesn’t our DJUSD board write a new mission statement and set new goals every year, let alone every time a new member is voted into office? Not doing so is another indication of leadership and managerial incompetence.

THE EDUCATION OF OUR CHILDREN IS IN FORECLOSURE!! The District needs cash. Plain and Simple. For whatever reasons….the State Government, past DJUSD decisions, lack of enrollment, city tax shortfall, whatever the reason…..you need cash to continue the quality of education for which DJUSD is known for. Harper Junior High and Korematsu Elementary School should never have been built. That was leadership and managerial incompetence at its greatest, as well as being an enormous waste of District money, part of which could have been used to repair and retrofit our existing schools. It’s time to liquidate some assets before you liquidate the education of our children. Your responsibility is to the education of our children. Here are some cost-saving options that need study:

1. Move district offices to Valley Oak Site
2. Sell entire City Block of current DJUSD offices
1. Sell the current District office building and rent it back for a year or two, if necessary, while preparing Valley Oak. It will take that long for developer to get plans approved to do anything with that site.
3. Sell King High School site, move to Davis High to Co-Exist with DaVinci
1. Recently rebuilt site should make for great office complex and raise much needed cash
4. Sell Nugget Fields Site
1. Last time I checked Emerson, Harper, and Holmes Jr Highs all have soccer fields
2. Charge the various leagues a nominal usage fee for use of Jr High Fields
5. Sell Grande Ave Site
1. Why wasn’t this done a decade ago when the site was determined to be too small for district use?
6. Liquidate other real estate assets
1. Valley Oak Elementary School site
2. Fairfield Elementary School site (Agricultural, Farmland)

We are fortunate enough to live in an area where Real Estate is still valuable and at a premium. The DJUSD does not have the luxury of being in the Real Estate business at this time. It’s time to refinance our education system and refocus on the priorities, THE EDUCATION of OUR CHILDREN. Anything short of that is another symptom of leadership and managerial incompetence.

While it is recognized that there are limitations on how land money is allowed to be spent, it would free up other monies to be spent on teachers and programs. Furthermore, with some effort, State Government could assist with emergency legislation to allow for alternate spending allowances. You’ll notice that the 6 prior listed suggestions don’t include closing the oldest Junior High, Holmes, or the elimination of luxury programs such as GATE, Caesar Chavez Elementary, Fairfield Elementary or the abolishment of all school sponsored sports and music programs. The quality education of our children needs to come first!! Refusing to study alternatives to closing currently operating neighborhood schools based on locally viable populations is another indication of leadership and managerial incompetence.

It is time to show some leadership and managerial competence by slowing down the process and by studying alternatives. Acting quickly and hastily is unacceptable for our children’s future and their education. It’s time to liquidate assets to save our schools and the education of our children. Failure to act to save our schools and teachers without looking at all of the creative possibilities begs the question……What is so wrong with Yolo County taking over control of our schools?

Respectfully,

Robert Shumway

cc : Assembly Member Lois Wolk, Senator Michael Machado, Supervisor Helen Thompson, Editor/Assistant Publisher of The Davis Enterprise-Debbie Davis

SUBMITTED BY CATHY SACKS

Another Emerson parent suggested keeping Valley Oak open and shifting North Davis students to other elementary schools like Valley Oak, Willitt, Patwin, Cesar Chavez and using North Davis for ninth graders and DaVinci students. All the ideas have not had time to come forward. I met with several Emerson teachers and staff last week. One teacher who has been there for decades said that Emerson is currently the best that it has ever been. They also affirmed that the structure is not in such shape that it warrants closing the school.

My greatest concern is that 1000 students at two Jr Highs is too many to provide quality education and safe, supportive climate. This is evidence by the fact that Emerson had the highest STAR test scores this past year of the three jr highs. Could it be because the kids are smarter at Emerson or it has better teachers? I don't think so. I believe it's the fact that there were only 520 students and a positive climate and supportive culture enhanced by a student leadership program and peer helpers. I've heard of two possible lawsuits against the district due to bullying and harassment at Harper. These tragic experiences and the resulting cost to the district could easily increase with more students at the two Jr. Highs.

SUBMITTED BY SUSAN HULSIZER

I am not sure that the district can afford to keep Emerson open, given the long term structural deficits. I have heard figures at board meetings that it costs $600,000 to $700,000 yearly to keep a third junior high school open. I was a little surprised at their figure of $566,000 savings to close Emerson. However, looking closely at how they came to this figure, I think it may be too high. As you know from the Superintendent's Parent Advisory Meeting handout, the savings of closing Emerson is as follows:

Principal, 1.0 FTE, $132,000
Vice Principal, 1.0 FTE, $112,000
Office Staff, 3.25 FTE, $80,000
Library Technicians, 1.6 FTE, $78,000
Campus Supervisor, 0.95 FTE, $38,000
Custodial, 2.0 FTE, $100,000
Utilities and other costs, $25,000
Total: 9.8 FTE and $566,000

I would not argue with some of these estimates, the principal, the custodial, the utilities, but I think we can all agree that the vice principal FTE will not be a savings as the vice principal and campus supervisor allocations at the schools to which the students are reassigned will be increased by the same amount, or slightly less. To a lesser extent, the office staff at the remaining schools will need to be increased for the larger student body, as well as the library technicians. If these were the only positions which would change, I think the savings would be closer to $400,000.

There may actually be other savings which are not listed here such as the consolidation of music or language classes, which might save the district 0.5 to 1.0 teacher FTE, which they estimate at $60,000, which would make the total savings of perhaps $430,000- $460,000. Of course my view is based as a parent with experience on site councils, it would take a more detailed analysis to determine a more precise figure.

The trustees are working to a long term solution on the efficacy of the budget for all students in the district. When they consider the closure of Emerson, I think they need a more realistic number of how much the savings will be. I would request that the board look at how these estimates were made, and consider the increased costs of campus supervision at the
remaining secondary schools.

SUBMITTED BY SANDY BATCHELOR

Looking at ALL of the alternatives is the responsibility of the board and I am extremely dismayed by the fairly narrow focus of solving this problem. It is only fair to study all of the options available to resolve this budget problem. It should be of grave concern that the board has not even looked at dissolving discretionary schools and programs. In fact, budget cutting option A provides funding to renovate Valley Oak to put DaVinci in!

Please go to this web site and look at the options.

You can download the options HERE (PDF file).

Also--please forward this e-mail to everyone you know in Davis!

It is unacceptable to close schools, deny renovation, despite monies available from properties owned, and then re-open them with "special interest"programs or while continuing to provide operating budgets to entire schools of discretionary programs as is the case of Caesar Chavez. They are closing core-curriculum schools, to finance running two entire special interest schools in the middle of a budget crisis. These programs are arguably valuable, but not as necessary as providing core curriculum in neighborhood schools as required by the state. They are not even on the table, and some get more funding in the end.

Something smells funny here. It's almost "Daily Show" worthy!!

If this infuriates you, or even merely annoys you, speak up...the reason this is happening is because people like us are the much too silent majority. Those with kids in the district-run "private schools" are very organized, very vocal, and very well connected. However, I feel we have the simple notion of "what is right" on our side.

Please contact the superintendent and the board with your thoughts...its all we have left and there's not much time.

superintendent@djusd.k12.ca.us

sallen@djusd.k12.ca.us, gdaleiden@djusd.k12.ca.us, rcharris@djusd.k12.ca.us, slovenburg@djusd.k12.ca.us, ttaylor@djusd.k12.ca.us

Thanks for all of your support.

Sandy Batchelor

SUBMITTED BY BECKY LINVILL

Hi,

Thank you for all your efforts to spread the word to Keep 3 Junior Highs in Davis! This is a summary of my e-mails since last Thursday, please pass it on.

TUESDAY, Mar. 18, 4 pm -

Rally to Keep 3 Junior Highs, Central Park
Students are encouraged to speak
Sandy Batchelor and Joan Crow have contacted TV stations
We hope for a really big turnout!
Let me know if you want flyers or posters to distribute (especially to Harper & Holmes Jr. Highs).

THURSDAY, Mar. 20, 7 pm (get there early though so you don't have to sit outside the Chambers)

School Board Meeting
Students are encouraged to speak
Agenda is here. (Thanks to Andrea Weiss for distributing this.)
click on "Jr. High Consolidation" to see 5 new options the Board is considering. There are other options that are not listed (e.g. revising boundaries to make 650 students at 3 Jr. Highs, having 2 High Schools with 9th graders (one at Harper), etc.). Consider supporting only options that keep Emerson open as a regular school.


NEW BLOG (You're here now!)

http://save-emerson.blogspot.com/
Send blog post contributions and ideas to saveemerson@gmail.com

WRITE THE GOVERNOR

Mark Cook encourages e-mail to the Governor at http://gov.ca.gov/interact

WRITE ASSEMBLYWOMAN LOIS WOLK

Moreen Libet encourages e-mail to Lois Wolk to enact emergency temporary legislation that would allow school districts to use some facilities fund money to pay teachers. E-mail to http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a08/

DAVIS SCHOOLS FOUNDATION REQUESTS VOLUNTEERS

Website is at http://www.davisschoolsfoundation.org/
Please e-mail Janet Berry if you can help at janet-berry@sbcglobal.net


Thanks again for all your help!

Becky

SUBMITTED BY SHARON P. AMON, MD

I don't know if this concern has been raised--
My son's backpack weighs 35 lbs. In addition to this, he often has special projects, bag of soccer clothes, other items, etc. If the school is 3 miles away, he will need a full bike cart to get to school or will need to be driven.

I suggest that if students must attend a school so far away, that the school purchase a second set of books for ALL classes so that the students are not unduly burdened with the excessive weight of their backpacks.

Please consider the cost of this when considering savings from closing our neighborhood school.

SUBMITTED BY TIM FAHLEN - email exchange with City Council Member Don Saylor in response to Fahlen's ideas submitted to the BOE

3/16/08 email:

Tim --

Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me. I know you will send your comments directly to Board members.

As a City Council Member, I have no authority or specific role in the school finance issues. I have to tell you that this is the most critical current issue on the minds of most Davis residents today. I am very concerned about the level of funding cuts the DJUSD is facing and the impacts those cuts are likely to have on the programs we have all worked so hard over so many years to nurture. Schools are the center of our community and my service to the community will be to come to the support of DJUSD at every turn.

My direct knowledge of DJUSD financing is out of date, since I have been away from the Board for almost five years. My comments here are based on watching the televised Board meetings and reading the news accounts as well as my recollection of school finance structures.

The DJUSD funding challenge is the result of a "perfect storm" of district specific enrollment declines coupled with state wide budget cuts. Declining enrollment is hitting many districts throughout the state. According to DJUSD Business Office, DJUSD has lost some 350 students over the past couple of years. The impact of such a decline in enrollment is tough to handle, because the district loses the Average Revenue for each student, but cannot reduce the Average Cost -- the kids are scattered across grade levels and geographically.

If class size were 35 students, we couldn't simply reduce ten classrooms and be done -- we still need the schools, the classrooms, the teachers etc.

I think your suggestions for revenue enhancements are all reasonable for consideration and I expect that the Board is thinking about each of them. A couple of thoughts regarding the specifics you mention:

1. Dollar a day -- I have been working with the Davis Education Foundation on getting this campaign underway. I think it has great potential for generating sufficient revenue to mitigate SOME of the needed cuts the first year. This is important to do -- we should all get behind it. We must be realistic that this will not solve the whole problem and that we need to do something to sustain whatever "soft landing" we are able to achieve doing this.

2. Major Contributions -- DSEF Board and others are working on major contributions and a host of fundraising ideas. To the degree we can, I think that working within the umbrella of that effort is going to be the most successful approach.

3. Improve attendance -- Absolutely. However, this must have some specific steps and some measurable progress to matter. In regard to the comments about small schools -- programmatically your points are on target; operationally and fiscally the cost of operating several smaller schools exceeds that of operating one larger school – the DJUSD must examine these costs and balance them in relation to all other programmatic/transportation/community issues. I don't know the answer to this puzzle, but it is certainly an important issue for the Board to grapple with.

4. Existing parcel tax -- This funding is committed to specific purposes as I understand it. The potential state cuts and declining enrollment revenue losses total about $4.4 million or so. This number will fluctuate as the budget deliberation continues to unfold in the state capitol.

5. New parcel tax -- Some Board members have been advocating for such a measure for the November ballot. One of the challenges in putting a measure forward is that the amount of the need is not yet known and may not be until August or so. The 2/3 vote requirement is always tough to achieve and benefits most from having very specific issues. It is possible that the local fundraising may allow some softer landing and a new measure can be considered at an appropriate time. This is an active discussion item as I understand it.

6. Sale of real estate -- These steps are probably wise for the DJUSD to consider in concert with some long range asset management planning. However, it is my understanding that revenue generated from the sale of real estate cannot be used for operational purposes. It is possible that some General Fund supported facilities costs could be supported by these facilities generated revenues, but I do not have a sense of whether there are any such appropriate costs.

See you at the carnival!

Don

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

3/16/08 email:

Tim --

I want to add one more item. Today I attended a presentation by a group of Da Vinci students. These students did a marvelous job of background research and have a good grasp of the technical issues. Their motivation is to somehow lessen the imnpact on Da Vinci that they perceive will come from the loss of about 75% of their current faculty. Like many concerned people they are speaking first from their own experience. However, they have recently reached beyond their own program and are now talking to people throughout the district with
similar concerns. Their energy and focus are awesome.

We talked about the need to support the whole range of education experience for all students. The priorities have to be 1) continue to support good decision making at the Board level in responsible and respectful ways knowing that no decision is going to be easy; 2) work hard on the short term fundraising efforts; 3) consider ways to build a sustainable fund base; and 4) seek ways to engage effectively at the state budget level.

I am so sad that this is happening. There are many community wide issues that come to mind. But now, we must follow the model of the Da Vinci students and systematically address the issue with the interest of all students in mind.

Don

COMMENTARY AT THE PEOPLE'S VANGUARD OF DAVIS

On March 16th, the Vanguard put up a commentary post about DJUSD's funding crisis and focused specifically on the potential closure of Emerson. Here is the link to that post which has many comments:

Vanguard Commentary re School Funding Crisis

SUBMITTED BY GUSTAVO SOBERANO

Save our schools Rally! : Come and let them hear your voice!

When: Tuesday March 18th
Time: 4 pm
Place: Central Park in Davis. We'll meet at Central Park (Russell Blvd. between B and C st.), rally there and then walk across Russell Blvd. to the DJUSD office.
Bring: posters, banners, friends and all your family (Students are encouraged to speak at the Rally.)

We can not allow the School District to take rushed decisions without an in depth task force study. The proposal to close one Jr. High will have deep negative repercussions across the whole Davis community and the environment! Laying off 20% of our teachers, librarians, psychologists, etc. guts our wonderful schools, reduces our quality of life, lowers our property values and decreases the city's tax revenue.

Spread the word!!! It's not just about school families!

SUBMITTED BY BECKY LINVILL

Ideas for Creating Additional Revenue for DJUSD:

1) Propose a bond to modernize Emerson Jr. High.

2) Start a massive campaign on the UCD campus and in the communtity to recruit transfer students from outside of Davis (currently there are over 100 transfer students).

3) Propose a measure similar to Measure Q that taxes each household for less than a Costco Membership.

4) Advertise (by e-mail, newspapers, school flyers, etc.) the Davis Schools Foundation campaign to "Stimulate Our Schols."

5) Charge minimal fee (around $10-$20) for all extra-curricula activities including sports, band, choir, etc.

Ideas on How to Reduce Expenditures for DJUSD:

1) Across the board salary cuts of 2% for all DJUSD employees earning less than $100,000.

2) Across the board salary cuts of 5% for all DJUSD employees earning more than $100,000.

Programs and Services to Prioritize for DJUSD:

1) Keep 3 Junior Highs.

2) Reading Specialists for elementary students.

3) All music programs for elementary students.

4) Keep all classroom reduction programs in place for all grade levels.

Additional Comments:

Please keep the public clearly informed of all possible cuts. It is disturbing to me that I found out through the newspaper that a proposal to eliminate a Junior High School was discussed at the School Board Meeting without prior notice to the public and without stating it as a possibility on the Agenda.