Comments on: Feb 5th Study Group Meeting

By: crystal kerins

crystal kerins — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 06:31:04 +0000

What a terrible dissappointment tonights vote was. Too many questions are left unanswerd regarding plans for the DO and what EXACTLY they plan to do with the proceeds from a sale to the City. Selling a 10 acre site to be able to afford to move MOT which would allow Smith and Dwyer to reclaim 2 acres makes ZERO sense to me. Why not retain the 10 acre asset and redraw the boundaries to relieve the overcrowding in these schools? I hope everyone realizes that the fight for open space has really just begun. The City must hear loud and clear the public demanding the retention of this irreplacable open space.

By: admin

admin — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 03:14:48 +0000

Good question!!! I have no idea what she meant by this. I will emailing her and asking her to REPLY here. Let’s see if she does.

By: KettlerNeighbor

KettlerNeighbor — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 01:19:47 +0000

Can anyone explain trustee Catherine McGough’s remarks regarding the Kettler site: “I personally would like to divest ourselves of a property that we can be certain will never be used for a school property again?”

The school is newer than the housing development adjoining it and is currently standing vacant. Isn’t the property usable–especially after recent the expensive upgrade, etc.? I would really like to understand what it is that Ms. McGough and/or the board finds undesirable about the site.

Thank you.

By: TFrancis

TFrancis — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 18:30:59 +0000

It is fiscally irresponsible for the Board of Trustees to build or relocate the School District office and Maintenance, Operations and Transportation Center (MOT) during the current budgetary crisis. The Trustees are not listening to the overwhelming number of citizens who have complained. They are intent on their “SMART” goals. It is time that the citizens of Huntington Beach provide their own goal. I suggest “TOAST”. TOAST stands for “Toss Out All of the School Trustees.”

By: Deryl Robinson

Deryl Robinson — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 05:31:32 +0000

So what did they decide last night?

I agree that Rechsteiner had the right approach.

I am friendly with Celia Jaffe and have a lot of respect. But I strongly disagree with her idea that the board’s priority is to do what they deem best for the district even if it’s harmful to the community. I the long run, if the community’s hurt, the district is hurt too.

For example, they are concerned about the impact of declining enrollment. If we eliminate our precious few play fields, why would young families ever want to move here? It will kill the community.

I think we need to get our city councilmembers to work out a deal to take over LeBard and pay the district an amount that makes it all work for them so they can meet their other requirements without selling a second site. Rechsteiner’s right, it’s four sites for the price of one. Maybe the district can lease LeBard to the city, or carry longterm debt for the city on a mortgage.