Town Square

Post a New Topic

Everest directors plan to sue Sequoia district

Original post made on May 8, 2009

A court battle appears likely if, as expected, the directors of Everest Public High School, a new charter school that plans to open in September, file suit on Friday, May 8, to force the high school district to amend its offer of facilities.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, May 6, 2009, 11:58 AM

Comments (1)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Libertarian
a resident of Woodside High School
on May 8, 2009 at 12:43 pm

It's very unfortunate that this situation has come to this. The district's actions with regard to charter schools have been hostile throughout from denying a charter for Everest to setting the school up to fail. The number of applicants to charter schools in the district should send a clear message that there is a desire for an alternative to what the district is offering. It's also clear that the district will waste what precious resources it has to avoid any sort of competition. Frankly, as a taxpayer, I'm not thrilled with the district using it's website as a propaganda vehicle for its position or fighting rather than working with charter schools.
This story does a disservice to the charter school movement by taking a quote off the web to bring up the tired mantra that the school is trying to avoid EPA. Note that charter schools are required to admit students on a lottery basis from the entire district. This includes students from the southernmost part of EPA to as far north as Belmont. A central location (e.g. Redwood City) allows the best access to the entire district and a location near public transit might be nice too. Note that the district's offices are at Sequoia which also happens to be centrally located in RWC. Where I grew up (Midwest), there was one public high school for the city and, surprise, it was centrally located. For the district to purchase land in about the least central location and build a campus there (without food facilities) and call it a reasonable facility is laughable.
A simple test for the district is whether they would be willing to operate any of their facilities (administrative offices, classes, etc.) in the proposed new facility. If so, then do a lottery to determine who goes where. It is my very strong guess that the district would never consider that because the Proposed "facility" does not pass the sniff test.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

I Told My Mom She's Dying
By Chandrama Anderson | 11 comments | 2,433 views

Grab a Bowl of Heaven soon in Mountain View
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 1,712 views

Quick Check List for UC Applications
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 1,148 views

Fancy Fast and Fun!
By Laura Stec | 3 comments | 927 views

“I live near Sunset”
By Stuart Soffer | 5 comments | 443 views