EDITOR: The editorial in the March 4 edition indicates that you
have joined the Morgan Hill School District administration in the
unrelenting and irrational drive for a second high school. You
criticized trustees
“foot dragging” on eminent domain to acquire land for Sobrato.
You stated that based on the passage of Measure B in 1999, that the
district and its trustees “have a moral, political and legal
obligation to build a second high school”. Really??
EDITOR:
The editorial in the March 4 edition indicates that you have joined the Morgan Hill School District administration in the unrelenting and irrational drive for a second high school. You criticized trustees “foot dragging” on eminent domain to acquire land for Sobrato. You stated that based on the passage of Measure B in 1999, that the district and its trustees “have a moral, political and legal obligation to build a second high school”. Really??
The administration falsely projected large enrollment increases to justify the need for a second high school. Enrollment is declining. Should this falsehood be forgotten? What is the basis for The Times’ belief that Sobrato classrooms “will soon be bursting at the seams”?
The administration falsely represented where the high school would be located. Do you really believe that the voters would have passed Measure B if they had known that several families would end up having their land taken by eminent domain instead of having the high school built on land donated by the Sobratos. Should this misrepresentation be forgotten? Also, why name it Sobrato unless it sits on land from Sobrato?
The administration continues to state that funds are available to complete and operate Sobrato. This is in great doubt for at least three reasons:
• The administration has not demonstrated an ability to successfully complete large projects on budget. Look at the 23 percent excess cost for Barrett Elementary, and look at the lagging progress on the renovation of Live Oak high. The administration blames this on the construction manager, but who hired and oversaw them?
• Knowledgeable teachers and staff have raised legitimate questions about inadequate construction management, and also the lack of funding to operate two high schools. The administration seems to not care.
• Although the administration is concerned about the effect of coming state budget cuts, the district officials seem unable to connect the dots between this and the added expense to operate a second high school. From where will the added funds come, with shrinking budgets?
I praise the new trustees, as well as the teachers and staff, who are willing to question the need for Sobrato. The administration has enjoyed a “rubber stamp” board of trustees for several years, and look at the bad results.
I hope there is a lot more “foot dragging” by the new trustees. It is too bad that the administration is unwilling to consider any avenue other than Sobrato. Maybe it is time to find a new superintendent who would be willing to consider other approaches.
A fresh look might just lead to a financially realistic plan that would meet our needs by expanding Live Oak, and avoiding the endless problems associated with Sobrato.
Dan Wilkinson, Morgan Hill
