EDITOR: I am against the proposed changes to the school
boundaries as proposed by the district
’s boundary committee. I do not believe the committee was
directed to look at the elementary school boundaries, I believe the
guidelines for setting the boundaries are not applied consistently,
and I believe the changes proposed are short sighted.
EDITOR:
I am against the proposed changes to the school boundaries as proposed by the district’s boundary committee. I do not believe the committee was directed to look at the elementary school boundaries, I believe the guidelines for setting the boundaries are not applied consistently, and I believe the changes proposed are short sighted.
My understanding is that the School Board wanted boundaries for the high schools. The committee took it upon itself to discuss boundaries at the elementary level. I can appreciate that the committee was trying to “funnel” students from the elementary schools to the same high school, but that seems to be a lofty goal at the expense of neighborhoods. A change of a school boundary should be directed at the board level, where members are elected, and not a committee level where members are appointed. If the school board truly wanted a change in elementary boundaries, then it should have stated that objective clearly. Public discussion and scrutiny would have been at a much higher level than what has occurred and there would be a greater sense of fairness.
Most of the current plans violate the guidelines the committee set for itself for redrawing the boundary lines. One policy in particular is that of “islands,” or where one neighborhood goes to one school but the surrounding neighborhoods go to another school. In most of the plans, Coyote Estates has been slated to be moved from Nordstrom to Burnett. All of the surrounding neighborhoods are assigned to either El Toro, or remain at Nordstrom. In addition, most plans have Holiday Lakes Estates going to Nordstrom, even though the surrounding neighborhoods go to Jackson. Our children who have made friendships with children in the surrounding neighborhoods would no longer see one another on a daily basis.
There is land dedicated to the development of a new school near Peet Road and Cochrane Road. When this school is developed, obviously there will need to be a redrawing of the boundaries. Children starting in kindergarten this year would potentially be moved twice before finishing elementary school. I cannot believe that several moves are in the best interest of the children.
I understand that the committee has stated school overcrowding as a secondary reason for changing the school boundaries. I can look at the addresses and phone numbers within our school directory and notice there are a number of students that are clearly not from Morgan Hill, but from Gilroy and San Martin. Before changing the boundaries, it seems very logical to me that we should enforce the enrollment rule to ensure Morgan Hill residents get first priority on Morgan Hill schools.
On a more personal side, we moved to Morgan Hill five years ago. The primary reason for moving here versus other neighborhoods or cities was the reputation of our local school. Living here has been a real blessing. Being at Nordstrom has not only given our oldest child a wonderful education, but also has helped us create a real sense of community. I hope the board makes the right decision, which is to evaluate the boundaries for the high school only. Let’s discuss boundaries with all of the facts.
Gavin M Daprile,
Morgan Hill
