NOTE FROM PTA CO-PRESIDENTS

We have been requested to explain how the Emerson PTA plans to use funds raised by the Carnival or other fundraising efforts. The PTA adopted a budget last fall that covers the PTA expenses (insurance, mailing costs, newsletter, etc), hospitality activities, 9th grade "graduation", and grants to teachers and the school to support student activities. These grants have included supporting the garden program, computers and video cameras, books for the library, PE equipment, and other teaching aids. The PTA has many outstanding requests from teachers for grants that could not be funded because there was not enough money in the budget to fund those requests.

As you may know, the Carnival was planned before it was commonly known that there was a budget crisis or that Emerson could close. Given that new information, the PTA will be considering revising the budget and will do so after engaging the entire Emerson community in that decision (as we are required to do according to PTA requirements and the bylaws). After the Carnival, the PTA could have about $20,000 in its bank accounts, maybe more. Just so you know, the PTA cannot directly support keeping Emerson open or pay teachers' salaries, but it can contribute to the Davis Schools Foundation. DSF does allow donations specific to secondary schools, but not specific to a school.

We invite the Emerson community to support the Carnival because it will be really fun and will support Emerson students and teachers wherever they may be next year. There will be lots of Emerson students/parents/teachers participating in events on Saturday and Sunday on stage at the Carnival and they can really use our support, including Antoinette "Butterscotch" Clinton - an Emerson graduate and internationally recognized beatbox artist; Jazz groups (Calvin Handy and the Vintage Jazz Players, Sax by Popular Demand, The J Street Jazz Cats, Jazzmatazz), bluegrass (Rita Hosking and her band - Cousin Jack), traditional Latin American music (El Trio), Emerson students (singers Amelia and Jen, Aditya on sitar, ), Willet Chorus, a Klezmer group, and bagpipes. There will also be lots of PTA-sponsored booths selling food and providing games. There will even be a birthday party booth for those who would like to celebrate their birthday at the Carnival.

4/1 SAC BEE ARTICLE about 3/31 BOARD MEETING

Link to story is HERE.

SUBMITTED BY ANDREA WEISS re 3/31 Board Meeting

Hello School Board Memebers,

I just finished reading all the documents related to tonight's board meeting. These are very complex issues and you have difficult decisions to make that will have long lasting implications on all the students in the district not to mention teachers and staff. Just as important, your decisions will heavily impact the economic heath and vitality of our community through implications for property values, recruiting faculty and staff to UC Davis, and quality of life issues that effect every citizen not just those of us with school aged kids.

Given the tremendous impact your decisions will have, I STRONGLY encourage you to give yourselves the time necessary to more fully study the implications of all the creative solutions being put forth. Choose to borrow from the reserve to keep Emerson open and the high school at 10-12 for one more year to give yourself the time to make a TRULY informed decision and allow the community to show their support of education by passing a parcel tax. The stakes are too high to make a rushed decision.

While the timelines outlined are nice in theory and I’m sure teachers and staff would do their best to meet them, the impact on all jr. high and high school students in the district should deadlines not be met or things don’t go as smoothly as hoped are just not worth rushing a decision. How often in life do things go exactly as outlined in theory, especially when we haven’t had time to think things through in depth or fully anticipate the unexpected?

Obviously, there are serious questions about the district's future that need to be answered by the Board: 2 high schools?, where does Di Vinci go?, How do we deal with a jr. high that needs modernization, how do we address declining enrollment?, how do we keep all the great programs?, What should become of the Valley Oak site? These questions all need to be answered but in a strategic, holistic approach with careful study and data behind the decisions. Not in a rushed, slash and burn approach to get the most money in the shortest amount of time.

Thank you again for listening,

Andrea Weiss

SUBMITTED BY GUSTAVO SOBERANO

Summary of the meeting with Gina Daleiden:

We met with school board member Gina Daleiden on 03/30 and these are some of the points that were discussed:

- Proposal H (from Emerson Teachers and Principal?) does not seem to be a viable option now (may be in the future), due to the fact that many Da Vinci students need to take additional classes at the DHS. Distance between Harper and DHS is a problem. Also Harper does not meet the standards now to be a second high school (it can be remodeled up to high school standards, but will cost a lot of money right now and presumably take too much time).

- Proposal G is being modified (not on the online documents yet) to either have the DVHS students at Emerson or at Valley Oak (without closing Emerson).

- The savings presented on proposal G are being revised since it does not include saving on custodians, consolidation of principals, etc. The school board will present a new revised economic analysis at the meeting on 03/31.

- If DVHS moves to Valley Oak, consolidation of principals (Patwin and Emerson) is a possibility.

- Vice-principal work at the junior highs (if only 7^th and 8^th) can be performed by counselors and/or teachers allowing more savings.

- DSIS can be moved to either DVHS site or Emerson (saving 0.5 principal cost).

- If Emerson stays open, we may need to choose between staying open and not being able to offer advanced classes (algebra, language, choir, band, etc.) due to low enrollment. Shifting of the school boundaries was brought up as an option in order to bring more students to Emerson. Another option is to bring more languages (Mandarin, German, Spanish, etc.) or special programs to Emerson (band, choir, drama, etc.), to bring more students from the other sites in town.

- A thorough demographic analysis, including density of children of different ages around town, will be reported shortly and will be part of the considerations.

- If 9th grade goes to the high schools, a WEB-style program (LINK at the high school) will be in place to help integrate them into the high school. They would also want to make sure that every student has a locker.

- If 9th grade goes to the high school, they may close the campus to 9th, and maybe 10th, graders (it's only open at lunchtime now, except for students who have an educational reason for coming or going , such as DSIS student coming for a couple of classes, or students who don't take 7 periods and therefore have a late start -- apparently, security knows all the kids who have business coming and going outside of lunch period, and other high schools have found this approach successful).

- Can't drop junior high 7th period now as another approach to saving money because of Measure Q. Changing that would require another vote in another election.

- Future construction of the University's West Village does not mean there will be a big increase in Emerson-district junior high students. The expectation is that that development will add only about 200 kids of all ages to the district.

-Selling DJUSD buildings would only support the facilities fund. However, leasing them would support the general fund that can be used for teacher salaries. There probably isn't enough time to work all that out before next fall, however.

- Safety issues and remodeling of Emerson will be discussed tomorrow (03/31) at the meeting.

- It appears that the meeting on 03/31 is just to hear community concerns, but it is unlikely that a decision would be made. The meeting on 04/03 most likely include some decision-making (9^th through 12^th consolidation, DVHS move).

Gustavo Soberano and Moreen Libet

SUBMITTED BY SANDY BATCHELOR ON MARCH 21 (AFTER PREVIOUS BOARD MTG)

Dear Board Members and Superintendent Hammond:

Thanks for the effective meeting last night. I appreciate that you did not close Emerson and seem to have genuinely listened to community concerns and ideas. Specifically:

Mr. Harris: Thank you for "looking outside the box" and pointing out that this IS a "rainy day." Perhaps we can put some money back into the "rainy day" fund with the parcel tax. The tax looks very minimal and do-able.

Mr. Taylor: I appreciate the frank manner and "right-brained" way in which you approach things, it's always good to have at least one person like that in the mix. I did not however, appreciate the fact that you re-iterated the backwards sentiment of the Enterprise editorial. The Emerson issue is not a "me first" issue. It affects all secondary education in Davis (half the kids!). One could argue that magnet programs, which serve a significantly smaller population are "me first."

Ms. Lovenburg: Thank you for asking for actual costs and savings of the options. Additionally, thank you for pointing out that without these numbers, not only can we not determine the best choice, we cannot weigh that cost with the potential negative ramifications of closing a school. I thank you for meeting with the parents of Emerson/Patwin and for obviously considering our thoughts. I also feel it is wise to look at where the next potential cuts could be so we can weigh those decisions with the current ones.

Ms. Allen: Thank you for suggesting that we need a facilities master plan--I cannot fathom why we do not have one already. This decision would have been a lot easier with that information. I believe there are other areas in which the Board does not have sufficient basic information with which they could make more informed decisions and promote good-will with the community at large.

Ms. Daleiden: Thank you for coming up with an option to save Emerson. You were the most responsive to my communications last week. I know you are all running around 24/7, but communication with the public is critical. Tempers only flare when we feel "railroaded." Thank you for bringing up the parcel tax, I feel this is very important and am greatly disappointed that the district missed the June deadline... was this a horrible oversight or are there other reasons? I like your approach of looking at the "whole system" as I feel we got into this mess by putting out individual fires as they came along in a very short-sighted manner. ( I think cutting off Emerson may become one of these "short-sighted" fixes).

The district needs to do it's "homework"...

1. A facilities master plan

2. A line-item budget, easily available, for the public, and a cost-benefit analysis of those numbers. I want to know how many children are in each class, in each school, to see if we are using every facility and staff resource. I want to know how much every program costs the district. I want an honest answer, backed up with data when I ask about a program instead of a cold shoulder that only raises suspicion. Then, I want the board, along with community input, to determine the priorities of the District and Board. The result; when inevitable budget cuts come, you know where it will hurt the least. More importantly, it will alleviate the "me first" tension that comes with lack of education and open, honest communication.

For example:
I did not understand why the district had to fund the DaVinci program once it lost it's funding and we found ourselves in a budget crisis, potentially cutting a neighborhood school. I approve of the program, and other magnet programs. I always support taxes/bonds which support our wide-range of programs in the district, no argument there, but it seemed fiscally irresponsible, in a crisis, to sacrifice basic education for "special programs". After attending the meeting (yes--I should have done more work before now), I realize that with a 9-12 consolidation, which I feel is reasonable and potentially preferable, we would be over capacity at the HS, so moving the DV kids out becomes a way to actually solve a numbers problem. Nobody ever explained this to me. In fact, I was treated as "divisive and unenlightened" whenever I asked questions. I have no hidden agenda to gut these programs, I just want all the facts and an equitable examination in times of budget cuts. Perhaps people are "unenlightened" because there is no way to really get this information, because of the defensive posturing around it, and because of the lack of basic studies as stated above, all leading to mistrust and suspicion.

3. Perhaps communication with the public needs to be improved. I did not realize we were in a budget shortfall previous to this January. Again, I take some responsibility, but I read the local paper, I publish the Patwin newsletter, you know where I live and my addresses, and this was not on my radar. On a side note, why was this deficit not addressed?

Lastly, please consider all the wonderful sentiments, ideas, and thoughts of my fellow "Patwinites/Emersonites"...(we float them around, you know)...people are hard working and have good thoughts and ideas, most of which I strongly agree with but should not address in one already-lengthy letter.

You will all be pleased to hear I will be away for spring break...see you at Emerson.

Thank you so much for all the hard work. Whatever the outcome, we need to know that this was treated with the discussion, research and integrity it warrants.

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.