Friday morning thoughts.
I left the house a little late this morning, and I’m moving a little slowly today, so I missed my bus by literally 30 seconds (I can’t run, so I had to watch it go on by and walk a little further to a different line.) As I passed the stop across the road, for the bus in the other direction, a bus rider, one I see almost everyday, but who rides another bus, looked up and said “Your bus just passed a couple of minutes ago.” It was really nice. So often, we see people frequently in our daily lives, but we fail to interact, possibly we acknowledge their existence with a nod, but that’s it.
It just made me feel nice, reminding me what a great community I live in.
With this in mind (great community, knowing people cursorily in it) I wanted to go back to the discussion about Edison Enrollment this year. Whitney wrote :
Lastly — regarding being careful in our use of data — are you sure about this 92 number from Edison last year? I thought it was 82 who applied at KG roundup
As this was offered as a chastisement (well-deserved, if accurate), I felt a little sheepish, had to go out and check with a variety of sources. According to the Alameda Journal, the number was 89 in the first week. This meshes with the Edison School Office Manager’s memory and with the district’s admin’s office. I’m happy to revise the number to 89, though I’m pretty confident 92 is correct. At the end of the day, it doesn’t change my point.
Also of note, long-time reader/writer, Dave, wrote:
The real worry of over-enrollment was never really ‘08, it was ‘09.
This is probably true for Dave. But the issue, as raised by a large voice in the community was actually not a specific year. The issue that was being raised was “long-term high demand.” (as presented by ESNN, the primary movers and shakers in the discussion). Over and over, the discussion was about how the “lottery” was a short term fix, when boundary changes needed to happen to deal with a long-term problem. One that the school district was apparently blind to.
The district’s facility review appears to have identified a way to deal with the short-term bubble that last year and 2009’s registration represents, something they said they’d be looking at all along.
I don’t begrudge anybody their opinions on this matter. As I said at the top, we live in a great place, one in which we interact with each other on many levels. Our school board members walk amongst us as equals, and deserve some respect for the time and energy they put in. When I spoke, in my original post, about vitriol, I feel that there was a lot out there.
I also think that people like Andy Currid did an admirable job of being passionate, forceful and respectful all at the same time. I didn’t necessarily agree with him on a few key points, and that’s fine in fact it’s good.
Popularity: 6% [?]
Leave a Reply