some questions that were asked, so i guess i will answer those. i was expecting more answers and questions. -- van questions. -- than questions. rather than looking at the rest of the questions you have, i would think in terms of having a

reduction so it does not impact back. -- that. if we have stops in one neighborhood, which could reduce that number of stops. it does not totally eliminate it. i think the sentiment has been that they reduce the cost of transportation, so i think by reducing matt, how do you say it, compatible? i would love to see a reduction.

does the board went to provide transportation after school? i think commissioner wynns mentioned this. if there is a critical mass, do we really consider that? if it is for private after- school programs, i would say that unless they're willing to pay for it, they are eliminated. i also have a question about the cdp's. child development programs. these programs are serving some of the lowest income families,

and so for me, i am not in support of that service for instance, for after-school, if a parent had to work, as you know, most employers would not say, "oh, go ahead. take a couple of hours off." we do not want to go back into the latchkey type of situation. basically potentially getting into a lot of trouble. i'm interested in finding ways, forcing a parent to say, "you are 6 years old. take the bus." the grandfathering of the stops,

i would say generally, no, we should not grandfather just because we have not, so i would say that is how i would answer your questions. commissioner: commissioner maufas, and then commissioner fewer: commissioner maufas: idea that conversations, knowing that there were other issues. i think we just need to continue doing that. really thinking about that is an option for them that muni and

public transportation goes by. encouraging the public to participate in that way, doing what they believe will work for them. muni has to have public forums right now, so here is an opportunity, and further, as i have said before, i think this is the great opportunity. i understand that muni drivers are aging out and entering into retirement.

i think that is one of the great stepping stands to be without work. especially during the peak time, as the spirit who came to the board and talked about increasing the bus route, what a great opportunity for us to put some paraprofessionals on so that the parents can say, "oh, yes, i know this paraprofessional." there is someone that they know and recognize every day on the bus. that is for the next transportation discussion. commissioner: commissioner norton -- commissioner yee: i want us to

explore what it would cost. it is hard to ask them to do more buses, but would it make any sense for us to purchase extra time for two hours, and how much would that cost? if you compare that to the average cost of the school bus, we'd be saving money? if we could do an analysis, that would help me. commissioner: i just want to say

this. the issue of the frequency of bus lines around school start times, we have three or four new directors, in what i think is that the timeline is too short. planning for the budget crisis, whenever, and their high level discussions about long-term planning. i would tell you that this would be framed in the context of transit first. if you want people to choose their schools, taking kids to school by car and maximizing public transportation, they're going to have to be planning years and years out to change generally all of the bus routes or only some.

to change the frequency. because changing the frequency of buses, this is what i mean. they have built in a lot of very frequent bus routes and 5:00 in the afternoon but none at 3:00 in the afternoon. and that is usually an afternoon issue, because kids go to school at the same time adults go to work, so it is the coming home from school that is the issue, and i think we need to talk to them about long term planning. whenever we think about that is great. that seems to be the sticking point.

some have said you cannot imagine what it would be liked they do not have the equipment, whether -- whatever, so i think we are aiming to a low. >> we actually had somebody at the table this time around, which we usually do not have anybody working with unique on this, and it in director ford is looking for to that. we have not been able to do that. they're very interested in morning to help with that, and they consistently asked about what would work.

we figure out what our own plan is, but certainly, the routes they have added and the way in which they look at patterns, it was actually a person at the table. commissioner: the main area i have is the afterschool proposal. we do not have full capacity, and just looking at my own schools, there are kids that are being bused to four or five after-school programs. if you are saying that we would not suddenly offered

transportation to his children that are being bussed off-site, they have nowhere to go. their families depend on it after school. until we can guarantee capacity, we cannot jerk that right out from under the families. i think there would be a willingness, but i think we have to be thoughtful about that. it is somewhat unfair of us to say there is no capacity on site for your kid, and there is no capacity and our child development for your kids, so therefore, we are quick to charge you for something that you have been getting for free. so if we're going to ask people to pay, what we need to do is ask it places said that where there is capacity on site, we could say to people, ok, you're

going to have to pay for it. so i really would just urge us to be thoughtful about that, it is after school is one of those things that is absolutely essential. you cannot expect a six-year old to get home on the muni by themselves. anyway, so that is my strongest reaction that i have. i think, also, i am open to not grandfathering stops, and i think we have to draw the line somewhere. i just think we have to give notice about this year, you will have it. next year, you will not. as commissioner wynns said, it

may be so draconian that i would not vote for it. we cannot be cavalier about that. >> i am going to direct staff to do an analysis on these. as much as i like a lot of these items, the reality is, here we are in september, and we do not even have a budget for the state of california. i hate to be the party crasher here, but we do not know where we're going to end up yet, and we know that for next year, after making $113 million worth of cuts, we're still going to have to make more cuts, so i think it would behoove us to have a breakdown of what these different items would yield, because it is better to have that.

it is good to already have that information clearly identified. yes, after-school programs are great, and especially, i agree with commissioner yee, if people cannot financially afford that, that is one thing to consider, but if they cannot afford it, i think they should afforded, because we are not out of this crisis, and i wish that i could say that we are, but we do not know. we know that next year is going to be a really tough year, and we do not know how the year after that is going to be. i think it really helps all of us to make better decisions once we break down all of these different costs. if this other thing happens, this is something else we might do. for the most part, when we could

afford this, it was great, but in reality, a lot of this stuff we can no longer afford, so we're going to have to make choices on class sizes and the different issues, and i think this also will have to have a number to it, just as we have a number for increasing class sizes, just as we have a book of list of all sorts of different things. i think it would behoove us to get that down so that as we move forward -- just think, as crazy as it sounds, in january, you have got the state of the state address, ok? when you think we are already in september, and we do not have a budget, what state of the state address would we get when we do not even have a budget? so those are things that we're constantly looking at. regardless of the decision the board makes, we are going to get those numbers, because we need

to make very well-informed decisions, and that would be a good mechanism to have in place. commissioner: ok, i have a couple of more comments to make. i really appreciate the cost of the after-school transportation. i appreciate what commissioner norton said. this is something we did not do not that long ago. let us add a stop there, and then this one, and that one. this is something that nobody does but us. we are busing kids to private daycare situations. now, i do understand that people depend on it. they have come to depend on it, and that is why we're talking about it now as opposed to next year, and we're talking about changing the start time to save a lot of money.

a few years ago, we talked about it in april. people said, "oh, my god, i do not have time to make these arrangements." now, we're talking about kind of one year in advance. we should look at all of these things. i personally think this issue of afterschool transportation to daycare, we should make it our own. it is something in my mind that is in a separate category. some people are really dependent on it. class size are not having enough money to spend on food at lunch time, there are just things. i am making presumptions about the relative cost. it could be very little for all i know. commissioner: can i?

commissioner: go ahead. commissioner: i think we want to have after-school at every school, but the reality is, we do not have that right now, and families have made choices and are continuing to make choices about expecting that there will be capacity for them, and so, by all means, let's rationalize it and have a plan about the after- school programs, but until we can accommodate people who depend on us, i think it is, you know, i actually should think we should have a conversation. at some places, some parents might say, "i would rather have larger classes than get rid of the after-school programs." commissioner: that was the next thing i was going to say. i think whenever we know about the implementation about the afterschool plan, -- whatever we

know, we need to know that at the same time that they're bringing us proposals for transportation. i said to the superintendent, "wait a minute. i thought we were going to implement that. we postponed it from this year to next year. i think we need to know that. also, part of that discussion, and we had that last year, was about also the idea that we talked about for a long, long time about some kind of rfp for private providers to bring some of those in. maybe it will save money on transportation. convenience for everybody. so there are questions related

to the after-school program. last, i do want to say that grandfathering is really an emotional question, but i think it is time. we are proposing a shift in student assignments. if we grandfather, we say just the ones that are in the school now, so another five years, then what about the ones next year? it will never stop. we were making a remark about great-grandfather's, but, truthfully, -- about great- grandfathers, but, truthfully, we need to weigh that against as much as we know about what it costs us and have those resources are aligned. i guess i am against

grandfathering, but unless some the convinces me otherwise -- i am willing to -- show us where that is not workable, where you need to grandfather, not just for people's conveniens. i would just quickly reiterates -- reiterate if they do not have the transportation for them, so that may mean some kind of facilitated process. ok, i think we are sort of there. we have some business. she tells me, i am sorry, that i failed to read out the number of the resolution that we made a recommendation on before, so the resolution for the attendance areas, the elementary attendance areas, and the substitute motion for the phased in feeder

pattern is resolution 108. the committee made a recommendation positively to the board to pass that. this resolution, the general education transportation policy. the recommendation is that we accept a new timeline, and we would recommend to the board that this will come back to us this would be on november 9. that is going to be the recommendation from the committee. and i want to thank all of the

communities, those who have stayed to the bitter and, and those who have stayed home, may be watching on television now, and also, thanks to the staff and to members of the board, all of whom were here. i think that and i hope that the members of the public understand how important all of this work is for almost every member of the board who has been here. so our next meeting is october 13, which is a change date, because the monday is a holiday that week. they key to everybody for coming.

dch