Editor's Note: The following is an opinion letter, submitted to Milpitas Patch.
Do you know when the last time school zone boundaries were evaluated?
Never.
Milpitas Unified School District (MUSD) has never redrawn the schools' boundary zones, and does not have a process to evaluate and redraw them.
Milpitas' population has grown from 26,561 in 1970, to 67,476 in 2011. (For references to this information, visit here and here.)
In other words, while the population of the city grew steadily over the decades, the school boundary zones went unevaluated, and the student counts in the schools have been left to grow without proper evaluation.
The result is the following:
- Travel distance for a lot of the kids is much more than what it would otherwise be with proper zoning.
- Poor Learning: Students as little as 5 years old, spend more time on the sidewalk amid dangerous traffic. This makes them tired before they reach school, resulting in poor learning and lower API scores for the schools.
- Reduced Traffic Safety: Morning drive times increase congestion on already busy roads, reducing safety to students. Longer distances to drive add to this reduced safety on Milpitas roads.
- Noncompliance to MUSD policy, section 5116: This section mandates regular review of school attendance boundaries. MUSD has never considered a full review with rationales including student safety, educational programs, and home-to-school distance.
- Loss of Funding: The above factors have forced many parents to choose private schools, and thus reduce state funding for MUSD schools.
One of the secrets of MUSD school attendance zoning is that the map showing attendance figures is only available at the MUSD office, and not online, like in Fremont and other cities. Fremont and other cities also periodically evaluate attendance zones to better reflect the population growth.
A few communities have approached MUSD to ask them to consider this request, and they were turned down with the response, "MUSD has never done this before, and will not consider it now".
The MUSD school board and superintendent should not take the easy way out, and instead should make the right decision for Milpitas communities.
It it high time to change this, and evaluate the school attendance zones and boundaries in MUSD to improve the quality of education for Milpitas students, as well as the quality of life for Milpitas residents.
Sincerely,
Pavan Basetty, a resident of the Reflections community
Rohit Sharma, a resident of Images Circle
Rakesh Shah, Images Circle
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/re-zoning-of-curtner-to-include-reflections-images-comm.html If you are unsatisfied with MUSD's attitude, please write to editor and author of the petition above and join the compaign.
So my question is, what do you have against Spangler? Why are you going to all these lengths to avoid that school? How much do you know about that school? Have you attended their PTA meetings (anyone can join the PTA!) to see what their parent support is like? (You wrote: Close Knit Community, Better PTA: Overall community interaction will increase because all students will be going to one school. This will likely result in increased interaction among students, parents and teachers.) You seem to have done your research about MUSD regulations, so I'm sure you've done your research about Spangler, too. Any problems that you might have had with Spangler in the past, you will probably also have with Curtner.
1. As I'm sure you know, Curtner School is full. There are close to 700 kids there. So who do you think should be displaced, so that your kids can go there? (What if those displaced kids then file their own petition?) 2. Didn't you research the schools for the area when you bought your homes there? I know that before I bought my home, looking into which schools my kids would go to was a big factor. 3. Are you REALLY saying that your kids will be so tired from walking 0.8 mile to Spangler (but wouldn't get tired from walking 0.4 mile to Curtner) that their API would go down?? Really? Because many students who go to Curtner walk more than 0.8 mile (and many of them are not closer to Spangler). 4. If you sent your kids to Spangler, maybe that would help the Spangler API go up. Now that would be doing the right thing for the community. 5. I'm sure you've discussed this with the superintendent already and gotten nowhere, so what do you think this petition is going to do?
thank you for taking interest and participating in the active discussion. It is encouraging to see so positive advocacy by parents/teachers/PTA-head/neighbors. Changing school boundaries (amid changing demography, population, and different income levels) is a recognized democratic process that mandates boundaries be reviewed regularly. It appears that MUSD board is in willful violation of this policy (Section 5116 of MUSD policy). Observations below is a hint at the diagnosis of irregularities. 1. Milpitas population has not been interested in school district affairs to the point that last election went uncontested. 2. 20 long years of MUSD president being in the board speaks for lack of interest by Milpitas population in MUSD affairs Our request to MUSD 1. MUSD to stop demanding increase of parcel tax. Parcel tax was increased by $86 to $280 in June 2010. (Measure B, parcel tax). MUSD must find more ways to draw money from county, state and federal grants. 2. MUSD is ignoring right to information by limiting access to this map. 3. The map should be put online like other school district - Alameda Unified (http://www.alameda.k12.ca.us/index.php/home/enrollment-information) and others. 4. MUSD must explain, why schools like Pomeroy and Curtner cover some households with 5 miles, whereas households with less than 0.3 miles are not. Let us all review decisions made more tan 40 years ago and fix where we find breaks.
If you were involved at the schools you would find a large supportive group of parents and teachers at every school . It is a stretch to say there is no interest in the schools. it is a discredit to all us parents to who are working hard to support our kids. In Feb, 2011 there was an opening on the MUSD Board of Education. I remember that there was 17 candidates. Seems like that was a lot of Milpitas community members ready to volunteer their time. Might want to check your facts. In Feb , 2011
1. In regards to school boundaries.... were you aware of the making a boundary change in September of 2009? See: http://musd.ca.schoolloop.com/groups/news_item?d=x&id=1251955625146&group_id=1217027460927&return_url=1284499409190 So, I disagree with your assertion that the district has never evaluated their school boundaries. And, when there is a change, I believe the district does ask for community input as in the case in 2009. See:https://www.musd.org/groups/news_item?d=x&id=1250438598857&group_id=1217027460927&return_url=1286659394743 . As a matter of fact, I suspect that the district evaluates enrollment and boundaries on a regular basis as they have space and staffing limitations at each school and works to ensure that as much as possible, neighborhood kids go to neighborhood schools. 2. The Parcel Tax from 2010, added a tax of $84 to properties in Milpitas. I don't understand what you mean that it increased taxes to $280. 3. I don't understand nor believe that your distance argument, as most private schools are farther away than the local schools. Therefore, there must be other and more revelant reasons to go private schools.
The last boundary change, in 2009, was a paper only change. It affected no school, no student, no family. It was done in association with new community's builder's assigning new community Sinnot Elementary (a higher API) school, against state mandated policy of short home-to-school distance. It was a quite change. It must have been investigated, opposed and stopped. Our parcel tax money helped a build sell houses for a large profit. Reference (credit post above): http://musd.ca.schoolloop.com/groups/news_item?d=x&id=1251955625146&group_id=1217027460927&return_url=1284499409190
Is this latest post saying that zoning boundary changes only count if they affect people? (Previously, you said that there had never been any changes; which isn't true according to the article above.) I'm so glad that they did NOT affect anyone. I can't imagine having to uproot my children from their current school. And please provide proof that "our parcel tax money helped a build(er) sell houses for a large profit". Where does that come from??
Curtner and its neighboring schools are ALL packed. In that case, redrawing the border will mean other schools have to redraw their boundaries too. This is a big change and will effect the impacted children tremendously. To impact all the current kids and making kids going to new schools such that a small number of people felt that they are entitled to make this change, certain does not put education in the top of their mind. It makes one wonder, is that petition really for the interest of our kids' education, or just some group masquerading their own interest behind this "crusade"? I'm confused your point about MUSD president for 20 years means lack of interest? The last school boundary redraw may have not actually change the boundaries, but it didn't mean the board had no interest of the communities' interest, or hadn't gone through all impact analysis and need evaluation. When one move into an area, one make a choice. All resources are available, it is not that someone pull the rug underneath. Milpitas school is like other school district, do have a school locator, not like what Rashmi claimed. As a matter of fact, it is interactive and easy to use school location.
By the way, I rather spending all those money and time on the schools need than to use it to redraw boundaries that is NOT necessary. You are right, MUSD should do take the correct action - it should NOT redraw the boundaries, leave them as is.
1.Travel distance for a lot of the kids is much more than what it would otherwise be with proper zoning. REALLY, for whom? Not all would benefit from less travel distance with what you refer to as proper zoning. Some may have to travel more, rather than less. Perhaps your perspective could be enlightened by thinking of how this would impact the whole community, not just certain members of the community. 2.Poor Learning: Students as little as 5 years old, spend more time on the sidewalk amid dangerous traffic. This makes them tired before they reach school, resulting in poor learning and lower API scores for the schools. Perhaps, if you are concerned about children getting tired from walking, you should consider driving them to school. Not sure how anyone could correlate walking with poor learning, I've heard exercise does the body and mind good - not the opposite.
3.Reduced Traffic Safety: Morning drive times increase congestion on already busy roads, reducing safety to students. Longer distances to drive add to this reduced safety on Milpitas roads. Traffic safety is important for all schools, rezoning certainly would not impact traffic safety, except perhaps to transfer the problem from one school to another school. Perhaps more effort should be made to ensure everyone follows traffic safety rules rather than focusing on transfering one problem from one community to another community. 4.Noncompliance to MUSD policy, section 5116: This section mandates regular review of school attendance boundaries. MUSD has never considered a full review with rationales including student safety, educational programs, and home-to-school distance. This point has already been addressed above as being incorrect and unfactual.
5.Loss of Funding: The above factors have forced many parents to choose private schools, and thus reduce state funding for MUSD schools. Where parents choose to send their kids to school (to private school) is what makes America a great place to live - we all have a choice. Have you done any research on the percentage of Milpitas residents who choose to send their kids to private schools? Any research at all or just making an assumption? While parents choosing to send their kids to private school may reduce funding to the public school system, I'm sure you would find, if you did the research, the impact is small. On a State-wide basis, I would bet not even measurable from a statistical perspectice.