News


Uncertainty remains over housing a bigger Bullis

School board members unlikely to pitch a battle over enrollment numbers

Los Altos School District board members agreed last week that they won't contest Bullis Charter School's enrollment growth projections for next year, leaving a burning question as to how the district will find accommodations for the charter school's 1,105-student campus.

Bullis officials submitted a facilities request under California's Proposition 39 law earlier this month, revealing plans to grow from its current enrollment of 915 students to 1,105 in the 2019-20 school year. Under the state law, the district is on the hook for providing "reasonably equivalent" facilities for all of the students who reside within the district, which in this case is 1,058 kids, from kindergarten to eighth grade.

While this is typically the time school districts and charter schools would butt heads over enrollment projections -- if it happens at all -- Los Altos School District trustees and district administrators didn't show an interest in contesting the 1,058-student number. Assistant Superintendent Randy Kenyon told board members at the Nov. 13 school board meeting that he believes the district can accept the projections without any objections, and that he and other district staffers need to trust that the addresses of interested families are genuine. Board member Steve Taglio added that he wouldn't question what appear to be solid numbers.

Bullis Charter School is currently housed in portable classrooms at Blach and Egan junior high schools, with roughly two-thirds of the students at Egan. The in-district enrollment, however, is expected to jump by 26 percent in the coming school year, from 838 students today to 1,058 students in fall 2019, and it's unclear where extra classrooms would go. Board member Bryan Johnson said he knew charter school officials planned to expand the school, but was disappointed to see they wanted to increase the size so quickly.

"The issue I have is their needs always seem to drive what we then have to do, rather than a more collaborative effort," he said. "Maybe less growth all in one year would've gone a long way to reduce the amount of disruption that is likely if we have to find a third campus to house some of these (students) because Egan and Blach are both pretty full."

The facilities request, which charter school officials cautioned is just an initial offer and part of a larger process, asks for the "exclusive use" of all 20 acres of Egan in order to house Bullis on a single site. It went on to state that charter school students on the campus outnumber Egan's enrollment, and that displacing the incoming eighth-grade Egan students would "disrupt the education of far less public school students" than displacing Bullis from the site.

The request calls for an additional seven classrooms, which would include two kindergarten classrooms, in order to accommodate the growth. The estimates are that the charter school would need 48 "teaching stations" -- or classrooms -- at the very minimum in order to be roughly equal to what students would get at a district school. It goes on to say that any fewer would be a "indication that the facilities are not reasonably equivalent" under Proposition 39 law, which has been the sticking point of lawsuits between the charter school and the school district in the past.

Estimates show that the largest number of Bullis students, 163, are expected to come from the Santa Rita Elementary School attendance boundary, followed closely behind by Covington Elementary (162) and Almond Elementary (133). The new school is also estimated to draw 122 students from the Gardner Bullis Elementary School, which is significantly smaller than the other schools, but is in an area where families previously had enrollment priority in the charter school.

Despite attempts to hedge the request as a starting point, the school district immediately responded with a press release stating that Bullis sought to close Egan, in effect evicting 600 junior high school students from the campus while denying future enrollment at the site. While the statement did not announce outright opposition to the proposal, it did state that the district has to look out for all students in the district.

"While BCS's demand for exclusive use of Egan would favor BCS students, LASD must equally consider the needs of all public school students when responding to Proposition 39 requests," according to the press release.

Almond parent Peipei Yu, who started a petition called "Save Egan and Our Los Altos Community" that drew nearly 5,000 supporters, told board members at the Nov. 13 meeting that many people in the community were shocked to hear the request was asking for so much, even if it is part of the process. She suggested the best path forward is to bring both parties together and find some type of common ground, walking back some of the harsh language she used in the online petition.

"This petition is very strongly worded ... but I want you guys to know a lot of families, I believe, want collaboration," she said. "A lot of families want a compromise on both sides."

Oak Elementary School PTA president Tara Williamson took a similar consensus-building approach, and said the school district and the charter school's leadership have an opportunity to work together on housing the more than 1,000 students -- and preferably quickly. She said it might be time to brush off some old ideas about site-sharing between neighborhood schools and Bullis Charter School, and to get "creative" when it comes to handling the traffic problems that would undoubtedly follow.

District officials are still negotiating a land purchase in the San Antonio area of Mountain View that could house a 10th school site, which would likely be part of the solution. The only problem is that the land still hasn't been purchased, and estimates put an opening date sometime in 2022.

Although the preference may be for collaboration, board president Vladimir Ivanovic argued that the charter school's growth plans were done without any sense of cooperation, setting the stage for an antagonistic process.

"BCS has taken unilateral actions to increase their enrollment numbers without consulting with anybody, and that's a concern to me," Ivanovic said. "It does not speak to collaboration and cooperation."

What is democracy worth to you?
Support local journalism.

Comments

21 people like this
Posted by Fuzzy Logic
a resident of another community
on Nov 23, 2018 at 1:57 pm

Several things in this accurate description show the fuzzy logic used by the district in this process. First, the district has provided portable classrooms to give BCS about 65,000 sq ft of space, which is below district standards for their current size. Adding 7 classes certainly means need for 7 new classrooms, but it should be more than that. It's not so easy to squeeze 200 extra kids into the same limited outdoor space, for example. Use of the specialized school rooms for art music science etc needs to increase too for 200 extra kids. 7 classrooms is a bare minimum and when I look at the BCS proposal I read it as saying that they can make do with less space if they are all together, but if they are split 2 ways they need more space to duplicate some space at each site, offices, workrooms, lunch areas, all sorts of things.

BCS has only met the demand for enrollment and not gone beyond. The district knew this was coming "Consulting" is not an issue. Did the district consult with BCS about the design of this new school in Mountain VIew? Everything I see about that show it to be very bizarrely planned, with many differences from the normal LASD school. Doesn't that require some consultation too? And 2022 is optimistic on opening it. The city council may well require that it be used for a neighborhood school, meaning no BCS there. Any consultations about that? What did LASD plan to do to improve BCS facilities for next year? Have they put forth any plans to BCS as of yet, even for less growth than actually happened?

The problem seems to be denial of the situation by LASD, not unpredictability of what happened. it was going to happen.


20 people like this
Posted by Time for change
a resident of another community
on Nov 24, 2018 at 9:52 am

Five years ago BCS and LASD entered into a settlement agreement in which BCS accepted a growth cap and less-then- equitable facilities in exchange for the promise of a permanent solution by the end of the five years. LASD has had FIVE years to collaborate with BCS and the Los Altos community to find a solution - how can they be “surprised” that BCS has returned to the legal Prop 39 process when there is no permanent solution in sight? LASD trustees are elected to manage our shared public resources, including public school facilities and revenue. It is concerning to hear their rhetoric of “us” vs “them” when all of these students are public school students. It is time for our community to insist on good faith collaboration and a permanent solution so all of our public school students have equal access to facilities and our community members are not pitted against one another because of which public school they choose for their child.


73 people like this
Posted by It’s time...
a resident of another community
on Nov 24, 2018 at 10:13 am

Solutions LASD could have implemented during the five year peace agreement to fulfill their promise of finding a permanent solution:
1.Move 6th graders to Egan and Blach, as all neighboring districts have done.
2.Choose a campus to locate or co-locate BCS, which currently enrolls 20% of in-district public school students
3.Draw new attendance boundaries for the shrinking elementary schools. Only apply to incoming students, so no current students are displaced
4.Seek an enrollment cap from BCS in exchange for providing these equitable facilities.
5.Consider creating some meaningful “choice” programs in the district to alleviate the significant demand for alternative education models.


2 people like this
Posted by Change to VOUCHERS
a resident of Blossom Valley
on Nov 25, 2018 at 7:16 pm

Eliminate all public schools and issue vouchers to needy families that can be used at government approved schools. Rich families often pay for private schools - all rich families should pay for their own children's education. Residents without children should not be paying for them. This WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY needs to stop. It won't, of course.


Like this comment
Posted by psr
a resident of The Crossings
on Nov 26, 2018 at 3:27 pm

Fascinating.

Has anyone else noticed that NONE of the comments here are from people who actually LIVE here?

Nothing like having non-locals telling a community what it should or should not do with its children and its money. We are intelligent enough to solve this problem without having pseudo-intellectual input.


8 people like this
Posted by 1 person
a resident of another community
on Nov 26, 2018 at 8:27 pm

Very amusing to have psr from Palo Alto claiming to live in The Crossings critique people's locales.

He doesn't know Mountain View or Los Altos very well.


9 people like this
Posted by QVC
a resident of another community
on Nov 26, 2018 at 10:47 pm

Yes, that is amusing ‘1 person’, Pattie S Rotondo doesn’t realize that Monroe Park is not the Crossings or that most LASD constituents don’t have any other option than ‘Another Community’ in the drop-down list. To her credit, though, I think she actually lives in the Mountain View portion of Monroe Park. But that is definitely not the Crossings according to the Nextdoor neighborhood outlines.


10 people like this
Posted by It's time...
a resident of another community
on Nov 28, 2018 at 2:21 pm

@PSR : The MV Voice does not offer "Los Altos" as a neighborhood option, only "other community". Please do not assume comments are from "non-locals". I live in Los Altos, I am an LASD constituent and I care deeply how the LASD trustees manage (or mismanage) our community assets.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

All your news. All in one place. Every day.

Gluten-free bakery Misfits Bakehouse is reborn in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 2,803 views

Premarital and Couples: The "Right" Way to Eat an Artichoke
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,754 views

What did you learn last week?
By Sherry Listgarten | 7 comments | 1,152 views

 

Race Results Are In

Thank you for joining us at the 35th annual Moonlight Run & Walk! All proceeds benefit the Palo Alto Weekly Holiday fund, supporting local nonprofits serving children and families.

Click for Race Results