Heated discussion by trustees was the reaction to an item on
Monday
’s School Board meeting agenda concerning a community day school
run by the district, instead of Santa Clara County.
Heated discussion by trustees was the reaction to an item on Monday’s School Board meeting agenda concerning a community day school run by the district, instead of Santa Clara County.
School Board President Tom Kinoshita was apparently irritated with Trustee Shellé Thomas’ persistent questioning and disagreement about the need for the program.
“Shellé and I do have some differences,” Kinoshita said Thursday. “My concern is always trying to understand her position in terms of the implementation or cost effectiveness. If I see a different picture, it’s really important for me to talk about it.”
No decision was made on the issue, which was first raised publicly during the April 7 board meeting, because it was a discussion, not action, item.
Claudette Beaty, assistant superintendent in charge of Educational Services, and Ray Houser, director of student services, presented the idea to the board.
“The purpose of these (community day) schools is to serve students who have been expelled, or received a suspended expulsion,” Houser explained. “The program also serves students who have chronic behavioral or disciplinary problems in school.”
Currently, the district has a contract with the Santa Clara County Office of Education to provide these services for 21 students, four of whom are special education students.
Projected costs for the 2003-2004 for 30 students at the South County Community School, which is located next to San Martin/Gwinn Elementary, are $372,090.
Beaty and Houser told the board the district can provide these services for approximately $306,000, saving the district $66,000.
The district actually owns the land and some of the buildings at the current location, Beaty said Thursday.
“We have an MOU (memorandum of understanding) with the county,” she said. “We have already had conversations with them on this, and they would like to get out of the MOU because the number of students they are serving is going down, districts are increasingly setting up their own programs, and it is increasingly expensive for them. They won’t need as much space as they do now.”
The program must be provided by someone, Kinoshita said.
“This is not a new cost,” he said. “Either we pay and do it ourselves, or we pay and let the county do it.”
Kinoshita said the idea to take over the provision of services has been on the back burner for a long time that has surfaced because of budget difficulties and a new, more costly, proposal by the county.
“It was kind of an ‘aha,’” he said. “It had been a board goal, been a strong priority, and then when the county came up with a new proposal, and the cost had gone up, we decided to do it on our own. It really emerged out of the district leadership, Carolyn (Superintendent McKennan), Bonnie (Deputy Superintendent Branco), Claudette. It was not greatly discussed in the performance-budget process, but it was there.”
Thomas said her objections to the program were mainly in the timing.
“We have no idea what next year will look like,” she said. “This isn’t the right time. I do not feel the district has enough liquidity to go through with that at this time.”
Live Oak High teacher Donna Foster, who spoke on behalf of the Morgan Hill Federation of Teachers Monday night, said timing was also an issue with the union.
“During the performanced-based budget committee meetings, the concept of a community day school came up as an aside, not as something under serious consideration,” she said. “The Federation point of view is that is would not be cost effective to start or expand the program at this time of budget constraints.”
Trustee Del Foster said Thursday he thinks the district needs to take over the education of these students so there is more control over the quality of the program and student retention.
“I have not been pleased with the (county) program because the students are not coming back to us,” he said. “They’re not applying for re-admission at a very great rate, we are losing kids and that is of great concern to me.”
Foster said he thinks the district can operate a comparable program.
“We have a good success rate with our alternative education programs,” he said. “This will be another tool in our arsenal. The question we have to ask is, is it going to remain a county responsibility or is it better to bring it in house. Many school districts have opted out of the county system. I think we can provide a program that’s at least equally as good, if not a bit better.”
Thomas said Thursday that she still believes the district needs to take more time to look at the proposal.
“I’ve always held the belief that if you are going to do something, do it well,” she said. “Don’t just jump into it. And, despite the fact that this supposedly means no new money, sometimes the best laid plans can go wrong. I think it’s very important for our district that we do what’s right for the district as a whole. We have to serve the greatest number of students.”
Beaty and Houser said the school could be up and running in time for school to open in the fall. Since the staffing would be paid for by state ADA funds (average daily attendance), Beaty said the district may look at including Gilroy students in the school.
“Oftentimes, with students who are in community programs like this, attend is a problem,” she said. “A possibility is to enroll 50 to get the 30 you need for the ADA. That might be something we would look at.”
