Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    May 18, 2011 6:00am-6:30am PDT

6:00 am
lot more. >> a couple more quick questions here as we are running short on time. we have got to talk about shark fin souop. -- soup. it is a chinese delicacy, the sharks are tossed back into the water to die. you took a simi controversial stand by admitting that you have been an -- eaten shark fin soup. explain a bit about this. >> i told the truth.
6:01 am
you may are may not get that out of a politician. i don't eat it at all very rarely, but it is a delicacy that is used for weddings and special banquets. having said that, i am a very strong supporter of the fishing standards that the u.s. has about how you properly fish. there are reasons for those standards being created. that is where the education is, the fishing practices. that is why i wasn't ready to support a ban. i wasn't sure if a ban was going
6:02 am
to get there or not. i want to the science to tell us the proper thing to do. i am very open. the that is where i have been on the environment. if there are species of sharks, if there are continuing things that we need to do to protect the oceans and the environment, the banning of eating this will add to that, i am open to it. the focus has been, i think a lot of san francisco and a lot of chinese eat a lot of this. they understand that the fishing practice is the thing that should be banned. we don't know if it will directly contribute to that at this time. >> there is time for one last question.
6:03 am
it is an audience question. how can the local hiring policy be made compatible with the existing situation. >> there is obviously policy and reality. the policy that embraces local higher. i want her those that pay more to have a fair chance. we begin with this construction ordnance where we have special steps to be taken for contractors to show that they are making every effort to comply with the word of its. we had people that were ready and willing to do that same work in san francisco.
6:04 am
in my opinion, that is not fair for all of us that is paying for those projects. having said that, when you look at the city work force, i begin by saying, i remember when lily told me, if you want this job, move to san francisco. i made that sacrifice. how can everybody do that? i am not sure. i would like to champion more work force housing. it offers everyone a chance to afford to live here. that way it is a little easier. for the most part, may be for their salaries, it has been hard to make that choice. >> things to the mayor of san francisco. a also think our audiences here on the internet and on the
6:05 am
radio. this meeting of the commonwealth, we are adjourning. [applause]
6:06 am
the ad hoc committee on student assignment. it is monday, may 9th, 2011. we have four informational items with some subitems. the major ones about the middle school issues. we have set up the agenda as we have before with presentations, informational updates and then board discussion and then public comment. as we have in the past, if we want to depending on if you have questions, especially clarifying questions, we may have discussion after each item or certain items. so we will not be strict on following that. everything gets presented and then you can ask questions or have public input.
6:07 am
we will begin with transportation for 2011-2012. >> good evening commissioners. the first three informational items on the agenda i will present fairly quickly. we think at future meetings we have future discussions. the transportation when presented with the board with the recommendations about the infrastructure back in february, and i did actually attach a summary and the community has it as well what will change this year and the transportation department put a hotline and phone number that people can call in. we had an online survey and paper surveys at all of the schools. the transportation number did not get any calls. 49 families filled out an online survey and we got about
6:08 am
200 paper surveys. some of the things were concern about access to afterschool programs and also discussion about which areas with the low test scores, transportation to the city wide schools should be too. so, from that we have looked at all of the suggestions for changing the vision and these were some of the guiding question that we had. we looked to see if the specific request was part of the future for transportation and if not we knew we couldn't adjust the draft plan for 11-12 because there is not the financial flexibility to do that. however we are looking at revisiting some of the other specifics for the city wide schools in terms of the recommendations. we are very specific about it. we are go to reevaluate those based on demand patterns and also looking at current
6:09 am
ridership patterns. we look to see if it is possible to have a cost neutral adjustment for the 11-12 school year to include a request part of the school vision and in case we are proposing to modify the 11 plan to do that. the next steps are to continue to implement the vision for 2011. these three subbullets are the specific changes we will incorporate in that were part of the larger vision and that can be amended for 11-12 without shifting the budget. and so we are going to add services from treasure island starting in the fall of 2011. we will modify the routes to lowe to include a stop near the tender loin and modify the routes for bryan to reflect the new location and develop an enrollment process for families so that anyone who wants transportation next year they can sign up and we will have
6:10 am
information about who is riding the buses. and we are also starting the work to develop routes to support full implementation by 2013 and we hope to bring to you sometime after july more details about that. in the meantime we are moving forward with 11-12. the second informational item is the attendance area boundaries. in the policy approved by the board they provided guidelines for an annual review of the attendance area boundaries. and the superintendent will notify the board about any modifications. these are the guidelines in the policy. additional guidelines include specific factors that we should take into account when we are evaluating the attendance areas. these factors will guide our process.
6:11 am
we have started to look at those. we are also going to look at the number of kindergarten applicants and the latest census and enrollment data. the emails are ongoing. we welcome suggestions all of the time. it would be in time for to us go to print and be ready to launch for the fall enrollment process. the third item is monitoring student assignment. and we generated a report after the march runs. that report is actually designed to provide families with information about the outcome of the march process. it wasn't intended to be an evaluation of the board student assignment policy.
6:12 am
we get various requests from folks. there are about 52 unique tie-breaker combination from the may run. can you tell me how many people that are x, y and z or with density x, y and z. it really does not work that way. requests can have multiple tie-breakers. there are 52 different combinations and we are trying to find out a way to share that without being overwhelming and easily accessible. we will do that and share it as soon as we have that. we are working on the annual report. we are consulting with the superintendents advisors and prepare to conduct simulations over the summer and review data from the march assignment run.
6:13 am
if tonight or at any point beyond this the board has any specific questions that they would like staff to explore as part of the annual report we welcome getting those questions and we will incorporate them into the work that we are doing to the annual report. the reason the annual report will be available in january is because we have to wait for children to be enrolled. we will take the enrollment information in october and we will use that as part of the analysis for the annual report. and in terms of the future ad hoc committee meetings, there are additional ones scheduled. so, on may 31st, we are anticipating a deeper discussion again about the quality of middle schools and would also talk about any revisions to the student assignment policy to reflect the decisions or the recommendations for the quality of middle schools and to also perhaps include some revisions
6:14 am
to the designation guidelines to take into account things like open enrollment and also looking at high school and recently arrived english learners. we might have recommendations to share about that too. i don't have specifics but i want to make you aware that these are some of the things that we are considering. on june 13th we are hope to share possible modifications to the attendance area based on our analysis. and to also share with you parameters for the simulations we will conduct in the summer and to discuss further questions to explore in the annual report. in july we were anticipating that the conversation would be mostly around transportation and further changes for 13-14.
6:15 am
that concludes the staff presentation on the first three informational items. we look forward to answering any questions you have tonight or future meetings about these particular areas. >> i think we should see if we have any clarifying questions about this or any public testimony. >> i wanted to ask about the transportation. i saw that there were cost neutral modifications made to the implementation plan. but can families be reasonably certain that whatever has been published now from 2011-2012 is part of the implementation
6:16 am
plan. >> thank you, commissioner. yes, that is my understanding, that these reductions eliminating services for 11 schools and reducing services for four schools are what we anticipate to be the changes for 11-12. that is what is being factored into the budget process. >> has their been outreach to the programs affected by the transportation changes? >> change you. yes. our staff has been working directly with garfield, which will be impacted by this. they are exploring ways to make sure that there are after school services available and at garfield and they have been working directly with school communities about it. for the first year we anticipate a minimum impact on
6:17 am
the after school programs. in future years there will be a more dramatic impact. it is not feasible to continue all of those. working on the redesign of the after school services. that is a major part of the program as we make more extreme changes in the future. >> any other questions? not just about transportation but any of these three areas? i want to just for the record, with all three members of the member and the three other commissioners that we welcome plus the superintendent and deputy superintendent. any member of the public that wants to testify on just these three issues? the transportation, attendance area boundaries or the monitoring? please come to the microphone
6:18 am
and identify yourself for the record. >> i believe the commissioner sent an email to vicki rosen about her letter requesting that the southern edge of the attendance area be shifted from 29th street to 30th street. >> all right. the microphone went off. >> i am just here as a neighbor supporting that. >> are we looking at that? >> yes. thank you very much. i received your email and follow up. it is part of our review and violation -- evaluation. thank you. >> combrg public testimony?
6:19 am
all right. everybody is here to talk about it. this is something that we are getting to the meat of it now. .how difficult it is to be an entrepreneur in san francisco. for me personally, the less taxation we have, the venture, and more we rely on people to take care of themselves, the better. commissioner clyde: i am in
6:20 am
support of the legislation at this point as written, because he is really protecting the impact to the general fund. >> thank you very much. good evening, commissioners and superintendents. it is my pleasure to get us started soon night, and we are here to present the support of findings and recommendations about building quality middle
6:21 am
schools. >> would you introduce yourself? >> we are going to introduce ourselves next time. this report has been formally endorsed by the parents and the entire membership of the advisory council, so i would like everyone to introduce themselves. >> i am the parent of a third grader and a sixth grader. [list of names] >> i have a third grader. >> we have a request. could you tell us which school of your kids go to your reader
6:22 am
-- go to? >> [unintelligible] >> you have to turn off your life. -- lights. >> sheridan school and herbert hoover middle school. >> i have a kindergartner at daniel webster. >> i went to the middle school and high-school. >> [unintelligible] >> thank you. >> first, a few appreciations to the people who made this happen.
6:23 am
the parents for public schools and be advisory staff, our volunteers, the middle school planning team, middle school principals and their staffs common the translation and -- staffs, the translation department, all the people that participated in the forums, and the board for extending the time line for us. we are going to talk about what we did and why, who we heard from, findings from the community meetings, recommendations to the board and the district staff, and then we will conclude. first -- it is my job to do this. sorry. what we did and why. in march of 2010, the board of education adopted a student assignment policy without community input on this idea.
6:24 am
last fall the community reacted negatively and delayed implementation. this spring, they work with district staff to organize and conduct a community forum to talk about middle school policy, proposed language pathways, and the goals were to let people know about the district proposal and improving middle schools, to hear the communities questions, concerns, and ideas about the proposals, and report the feedback to the board of education and district staff to inrm your positions and strengthen the new system for all middle schools. >> when the community forum happened, and we heard from 850 people. we went to 12 novels schools, five elementary schools, and
6:25 am
held target groups. they range from an dozen to two larger people. some of the elementary schools actually had more people. we know large centralized events do not intend to draw a group of people that is representative, so we targeted to make sure we heard from diverse backgrounds, and we found that parents who participated in these groups did more close to represent the student -- more closely represents the student population. we heard the same concerns we have heard in the past and reported 04. -- before. we have full confidence this reflects the district. the main messages we heard during the community forums were
6:26 am
similar to what we heard families say repeatedly over the last several years and what we repeatedly told to the staff. parents want quality schools, and they do not perceive all schools as quality schools. schools are different from each other. parents want a school but will meet their children's needs. those parents question whether students assignments having any direct relationship to building quality middle schools. most parents would like their children to attend a school that is easy to get to, but they also care about special programs. many parents would be willing to send their children to a school further away if it would meet their needs. many parents challenged a pattern as unfair and inequitable. they do not want to field force
6:27 am
in something that will not work for their kids. now -- to feel forced in something that will not work for their kids. besides identifying things we knew we had heard before, a couple of different issues emerged in these conversations. first, there is widespread support for expanding language programs. of the same time, parents wanted to meet the needs of all students, including newcomers who spoke languages in addition to cantonese and mandarin students wanted recognition of their by cultural identity. also specialty education students who should have access before high school to learn another language. people also raised fundamental questions about how to meet different academic needs, and
6:28 am
these questions include how do we best meets different learning styles and abilities. how can the district support providing instruction? why does access to high-quality education so uneven? finally, people wondered what is in place now and what can be put in place, the impact with budget cuts, and how this fits into efforts to align curriculum across the district. good >> we will discuss more on our findings. quality middle schools, language pathways, student assignment, how parents felt about the process. quality level schools. people have different priorities, but these schools where the principal and staff have a clear vision about how to meet different needs of
6:29 am
diverse student populations. while the district described a list of factors related to quality schools, no real information was presented about what the challenges are, what is working and specific plans for improving schools. where is the research for what is the effective bowman -- affective? and what are they doing? can we replicate that bowman -- can we replicate that? the district is changing how special education services will be provided but did not talk about fat and how patterns could meet the needs of students and -- did not talk about that and how parents could meet the needs of students. special education needs are not being addressed. we need resources. there is not a lot of talk about special education. what is the thry