Students Bear the Consequences of the School Closure Vote
Today's Bee editorial lauds the SCUSD board of education for "tough but wise" decision" on schools closures because the district needed to close schools because of shrinking enrollment. While it is true that the district has too many schools for its enrollment, the objections many had with these school closures was the process. It was too hasty, used questionable data about school capacity, had no plan in place for student safety and engaged the public after the fact. In short, it did not follow best practices recommended by the California Dept. of Education. All this for a mere $1.2 million dollars a year--a savings that will probably wiped out when the charter schools that will inevitably take over some of these sites enroll SCUSD students and further decrease the district's enrollment.
The district had no real plan, that was evidenced by the removal of schools from the list at the last minute. This demonstrated, not flexibility, but an attempt to buy the votes of reluctant board members Arroyo, Rodriguez and Prichett. All this talk about providing transportation is just that. The district doesn't have money to pay for it. How could it? It doesn't have the money to keep these schools open. Open enrollment isn't an option if you have no means to get your child to a school outside your neighborhood. Choice is a myth for those without means. The
The district had no real plan, that was evidenced by the removal of schools from the list at the last minute. This demonstrated, not flexibility, but an attempt to buy the votes of reluctant board members Arroyo, Rodriguez and Prichett. All this talk about providing transportation is just that. The district doesn't have money to pay for it. How could it? It doesn't have the money to keep these schools open. Open enrollment isn't an option if you have no means to get your child to a school outside your neighborhood. Choice is a myth for those without means. The
