Kolb Elem Meetings


Town Hall Meeting
When: Wednesday, February 4
Time: 6:30 p.m. -8:00 p.m.
Where: Dougherty Elementary School Multi-Purpose Room
5301 Hibernia Drive, Dublin

At last night's board meeting I asked the question: If you had to choose should you go to the 2/4 Townhall meeting at Dougherty or the 2/10 Board meeting to share your thoughts about the Kolb Elem. issue? Frankly, it would be smart to attend both, but I think the 2/4 Town Hall meeting, which is purposely brought to the neighborhood impacted would provide the most interaction. The board and staff agreed. Notes will be taken by staff of citizen comments and shared immediately with the board. Any questions can be answered on the website or calling me at 925-551-5965 or ledahljohn@dublin.k12.ca.us.

John B. Ledahl

REMINDER ON KOLB ELEM ISSUE MEETING

Town Hall Meeting
When: Wednesday, February 4
Time: 6:30 p.m. -8:00 p.m.
Where: Dougherty Elementary School Multi-Purpose Room
5301 Hibernia Drive, Dublin

Just a reminder that the Kolb issue will be brought to the board for decision this coming week.

When: Tuesday, February 10
Time: 6:30 p.m.
Where: Board Room
7471 Larksdale Ave, Dublin

Only about 40 people showed up for the Town Hall meeting on the 4th at Dougherty Elem. You can't have input if you are not there. Please spread the word about this important meeting. Thanks.


John B. Ledahl

Dan - will there still be a meeting on 1/27 worth attending or should we wait until the 2/4 Board meeting to discuss the future of Kolb. Please let me know and I'll be where it makes most sense.

Tx, John Z.

John Z.,

The agenda for January 27 does not list any action or discussion regarding Kolb. I would recommend attending both the February 4 town hall and the February 10 Board meeting. If your time only allows one meeting, I would recommend the February 10 Board meeting. Comments there are entered into the minutes and the Board Trustees will have your comment fresh in their mind before rendering a decision that same night. Unfortunately, numbers count; the District often associates community acceptance of an idea by the lack of significant numbers speaking against it. No matter what your opinion about the timing of the Kolb discussion, you should try to encourage as many people as you know to come and state their comments.

The District is trying to come up with a plan to house all students within the boundaries of Dougherty, Green, and Fallon without forced diversions for the 2010/2011 school year only. They are exploring utilizing all space at the existing schools coupled with slight class size increases. This approach may reduce the need for Kolb for at least part of the 2010/2011 school year. However, the numbers do not indicate anyway to handle student projections for the 2011/2012 instructional year (and perhaps the second half of 2010/2011). None of this affects the huge bid savings the District can realize by advertising for construction now and perhaps not opening the school until winter 2010 or summer of 2011. Not only would we receive a very competitive bid, but we could eliminate the need to give the contractor incentives to complete this very aggressive construction schedule by summer 2010. This approach also negates the concern over the $500,000 operating cost for the first year. This approach relies heavily on the District presenting at the February 4 town hall reasonable assumptions and projections for the 2010/2011 school year and assurance that forced diversions will not occur. In no case should we limit our future options by delaying the construction.

Dan Cherrier

John,

I am not sure if there will be much of a discussion at the 1/27 meeting as staff needs more time to present information to the community on 2/4. There may not even be an agenda item on 1/27. You should attend the town hall on 2/4 and encourage others to attend as well. You might want to come to a school board meeting anyway. Its gets lonely at times with no one in the audience...

John B. Ledahl
LedahlJohn@Dublin.k12.ca.us

Hi John L. - thank you for letting everybody know that the Kolb discussion will take place mostly on 2/4. I see that the DUSD will be hosting the town hall at Dougherty Elementary so that it is more convenient for residents living near the Kolb school site. That was a considerate move.

Thx, John Z.

Thanks Dan for the response.

As I said I agree that the Town Hall meeting is necessary before the board makes a decision. Here are some "facts" that I question.

* The district standard for schools is 650 +/- 100. It was done with this flexibility just for issues like this one.

* 25 per classroom is the # used by Mr. Cherrier to figure possible need for portables? Not for K-3, which is 20 and the rest could be as high as 28 a room per union contract. However, this does not mean this will happen. We are still in the process of figuring out the impact of state budget cuts with a community wide budget committee meeting soon. BTW, I agree portables should be avoided if possible.

* A boundary committee will meet soon to discuss boundaries across the district, not just for Kolb.

* Money to build Kolb comes from developer fees, but also the state provides money as well. The poor housing market has driven this problem, not the district.

* I wouldn't minimize the impact that $.5 million in possible savings would have on the general fund. It could mean the difference in saving or losing K-3 class size reduction to 20 per room. Or the elimination of music or athletics across the district. Its a lot of money. Which one of your kids teachers should we lay off to fulfill this money loss?

Again, I applaud your providing information on a critical issue. An ongoing concern I have had is the district possibly putting information out to the community before staff has had time to refine both numbers and make recommendations. They are usually smart enough not to do that, especially when all budget related items are still getting defined by the state. Alternatives will be presented to the board soon for a decision.

John L.

Hi John,

Thank you for being more specific. I will attempt to reply to each of your points.

I agree that the District design standard is 650 +or- 100. However, what is important here (and what the District shows in published documents) is the actual capacity of each school as it will exist in 2010. During the interim Green is expected to add two permanent classrooms at the east end of C wing. The number of “unhoused students” originated from the District.

I used 25 as a weighted average of the number of students per room with a result of 12 portables by the 2011 school year. If we used 28 students per room the number would reduce to 11; likewise, if we use 20students per classroom as you suggest might be applicable, the number would increase to 15.

I heartily support a Boundary Committee. It is very important that community input is carefully considered with decisions of this magnitude. However, as the Board pointed out at the last meeting, the decision for Kolb must be completed before the committee can make its recommendations. It was Dr. Marken that suggested that the “obvious boundary change includes the transit center and Camp Parks” at the last Board Meeting.

As you point out a large portion of the money to build Kolb originates with the Office of Public School Construction through the State Allocation Board. However, our share is what is important and it is vital that we spend that money wisely. Any dollar that we save in the construction Kolb will be left over to construct E-4 and E-5.

The general operating fund for the District is approximately $49 million. Five hundred thousand represents only 1% of this budget. I agree that significant changes have to occur to balance the District’s budget. However, providing a safe and comfortable learning environment for our students is the top priority. Providing the opportunity for students to attend neighborhood schools may make the difference in parents choosing to locate in Dublin and increase District revenue by attending schools here. The impact to next year’s total operating budget will be 6%. Why is the District so quick to layoff teachers and cut programs without exploring the idea of making a straight reduction across the whole District (including Leadership salaries) of 6%? Companies all across America are implementing similar solutions. However, the budget issues should be discussed elsewhere and separate from the Kolb decision.

I must disagree with your last point, for to long the District staff has operated behind closed doors. The District is a public entity paid for by public money and impact fees. Transparent operations are a must. To always wait for the District to acquire perfect information and present well polished recommendations is not appropriate. Information should be shared as it is obtained and the community kept informed of the decision making process. I respect, the tough decisions the Board is sometimes forced to make. However, the decision, even if you do not agree with it, is always easier to accept if the process of getting to that decision is transparent. I would have thought the debacle with the Nielsen closure last year would have made that aspect clear.

These points appear to be fairly minor and do not detract form the main issue of saving millions of construction dollars for the District by advertising for the construction now.

Dan Cherrier

Dan,

So, we can debate some numbers and approaches. However, there are two areas where we very much disagree and a further discussion would be helpful. The General Fund (think expense budget), has about 85% dedicated to salary and related compensation with little room for change unless you cut staff. Leadership and the Unions are working together to do what they can to fight the problem as well. Using your $49 million total, that leaves about $7.35 million left for program, including some mandated programs. We have already cut well over $1.5 million this year with reductions in leadership staff, teachers, the Nielsen closure, and reduced programs. There is no fat left. We are being directed by the state to reduce another $1.9 million for this year, PLUS another $1.1 million for next year. To me that makes a possible $500,000. savings a year extremely important to our district programs, including saving teacher jobs. Don't you agree?

Your point about "the District being so quick to layoff teachers and cut programs without exploring the idea of making a straight reduction across the whole District" is both untrue and not what the experts consider a good approach when dealing with an education institution, rather than a company. Had you been part of the community budget committee over this past year you would have known that a top priority was (and is) to make cuts as far away from the classroom as possible. This means protecting teachers as much as possible. The problem of across the board cuts is it shows no science to our decisionmaking. As now President Obama has said, we need to make cuts with a "scapel, not an axe" in order to preserve our quality education. A new Financial Advisory Committee (Budget) made up of parents, community members, teachers, principals, and staff will convene soon to take on the massive job of making cuts as a community for this year and next. It is, and has been, as transparent a process as there could be and has always been so. You can't separate opening a school with construction monies from providing program to that school from general fund monies. We ignored that equation 10 years ago with the re-openng of Dublin El and the district immediately went into fiscal crisis because of it.

On the second point of our disagreement, I think we may be talking past each other. I too want solid information made available to the community in a timely manner - especially in capacity by school numbers, etc. I have made it clear that as a board member I expect the community to be informed in a timely manner before decisions are made by the board. However, I think it is vital that alternatives on problems like this have to be well thought out, based on solid data. That is what I asked staff to do at the last board meeting, come up with realistic alternatives for the decision based on analysis. You can't say we all have a right to be critical of recommendations without giving staff time to put together substantiated ones.

Staff or others providing misinformation or incomplete information leads to a breakdown in communication, it does not build it up. In this case we will hopefully wait until all analysis is done before presenting findings and making decisions. I consider that wise. I also, like you, consider it wise to make sure those affected are part of the process.

You know, there is another tact we can use. Obama has called for all of us to pull together to fight our common enemies and challenges. I wholeheartedly agree. District staff does not have any motive to hide information. They are using their precious available time and efforts (working day and night) to come up with good solutions. You, Dan, have always been welcome to bring your ideas and questions to either staff or board members. In fact, that is what I have been suggesting in this discussion. Wouldn't that work better? Can we agree that working together is the best approach to our common problems? I am so sick and tired of "East vs. West", or them vs. us. An important fact is that our country, and our city, are in serious trouble and the only way we will win over it is by working together. I value your mind and efforts. In this regard I have made your thoughts and concerns available to Dr. Hanke. Call him up and start a dialog with him. You know how to reach me as well.

John B. Ledahl
LedahlJohn@Dublin.k12.ca.us