News

County committee delays decision on O'Connor Street transfer request

 

Faced with a stack of new information, the members of the San Mateo County Committee on School District Organization decided at their May 4 meeting to wait until June to decide whether 31 properties on Menlo Park's O'Connor Street may transfer from the Ravenswood to the Menlo Park school district.

The proposed new meeting time is 7 p.m. Tuesday, June 2, at the County Office of Education, 101 Twin Dolphins Drive in Redwood City.

Residents of the 31 homes, from 235 to 495 O'Connor St., between Elliott Drive and Euclid Avenue, want to transfer to the Menlo Park City School District from the Ravenswood City School District. The district boundary runs down the middle of O'Connor Street.

Members of the county committee heard from a number of residents of O'Connor Street who have argued that it was only a historical accident that left them in the Ravenswood district when most of the rest of the Willows neighborhood transferred into the Menlo Park district in 1983. That's because their side of the street was annexed into Menlo Park soon after the original petition to change districts was filed, but their homes weren't added to the petition.

Nancy Magee, who serves as secretary of the committee and provides staff support for it, said in response to earlier questions from committee members she looked up exactly what voters had approved when they voted on the original 1983 transfer that moved most of the rest of the Willows into the Menlo Park School District. She said that voters from both school districts voted to approve the original 1983 transfer of "the Willows neighborhood." At the time of the vote both sides of O'Connor Street were in Menlo Park; but because the odd-numbered side of the street was not in the petition, it was not included in the transfer.

A number of neighbors spoke of their desire to unify their neighborhood with the transfer. "This is a very unique middle-class neighborhood. Very ethnically diverse," said Kim Chun. "A lot of really good people in our community put their heart and sweat into this petition."

Adela Mazzon asked the county committee to think about the neighborhood's children first. "As you make your vote, I would like you to think about our children," she said. "Give our children the opportunity to go to school with their friends and their neighbors."

But several residents of East Palo Alto also spoke, saying that over the years, transfers of homes out of their school district, and of property out of East Palo Alto, has eroded their community.

"I wish you could give us back all that was ours," said Randy Jackson, who said he has lived in East Palo Alto for 50 years. "Where does it stop?" Over the years, he said, "those who had more could take from us."

"If you only knew what we've gone through just to try to hold it together," he said. "Don't become another part of the problem."

The transfer is opposed by both the Menlo Park and Ravenswood school boards, but the County Committee on School District Organization will make the decision on whether approve the transfer. However, opposition by the districts' boards means an election must be held if the county committee does approve it. The committee will decide what areas would participate in the election. That could be just the homes involved, or voters in both school districts.

Representatives of the Ravenswood district said they are particularly worried about the effect the loss of the 31 homes would have on the district's ability to raise bond money for school improvements. They said if they lose the homes from their tax base, the district's more than $45 million bond limit would be reduced by about $250,000.

Representatives of the Menlo Park district say that their schools are already overcrowded and cannot handle more children. Educating children from the homes would cost the district more money than the transfer of property taxes would bring in, they said.

The committee's decision can be appealed to the state board of education.

Comments

27 people like this
Posted by Jeff
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on May 5, 2015 at 1:05 pm

RSD has used $9MM of their available $45MM in bonds and yet somehow $250k in bond eligibility is important ? I suspect the voters would never allow the school board to even come close to their maximum allowable amount. How much money has the RSD & MPSD spent on their lawyers and other consultants? Apparently, the RSD qualifies for county funding to make up for any loss associated with the transfer. Funny, how their high priced lawyers they brought to the meeting failed to mention this little fact when they were claiming how independent they were in this process....given they represent BOTH school boards in this matter.

MPSD has been even more disingenuous with their fake accounting efforts being completely destroyed by the petitioners. The effort MPSD made to justify a claim of a 40% increase in property values was at a minimum reckless and most certainly grossly incompetent. Some might refer to it simply as dishonest. Hardly the legacy these representatives want to have to answer to in the next election.

MPSD is terrified of "ethnic" hordes invading their school system if this is approved. And the RSD encourages their citizens to cry racism in the face of a tiny community that is only 60% caucasian. In the middle are the families of a tiny section of The Willows that was already transferred to Menlo Park many many years ago. Elementary school children are the victim of politics. The position of MPSD and RSD are morally bankrupt and intellectual corrupt.

I can hardly wait for the next election. Members of both boards will be called to account.


14 people like this
Posted by John Brady Barksdale
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on May 5, 2015 at 1:15 pm

Correction to the author of this Article:

The addresses are 235 to 495 O'Connor St., not 295 O'Connor.


26 people like this
Posted by Mario
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on May 5, 2015 at 1:29 pm

@Jeff

your points make sense. Even Ravenswood City School District conceded in their analysis that there would be a 121% gain NET 21% gain based on their research nowhere near MPCSD 45% figures which they did not bother to back up at the meeting.

$9MM of $45MM ~ 20% used up and they have to spend that in order to get to the $250k of these 31 homes ~1/2 of 1%? Also to my understanding (dozed off a little Bond Discussion, that the school district can not just get this that they have to have a series of elections and ballot measures to put achieve their max output of $250,000 from these 31 homes. Who is going to vote on approving these year after year when the school board clearly has not been using their money wisely on investments just upkeep.

As a member of Menlo Park and the Willows,but not directly part of this petition I would vote YES to approve if it goes to vote.


5 people like this
Posted by Barbara Wood
Almanac staff writer
on May 5, 2015 at 3:39 pm

Barbara Wood is a registered user.

Thank you John for catching my typo - fixed it.


13 people like this
Posted by Deep Throat
a resident of Hillview Middle School
on May 5, 2015 at 5:17 pm

"MPSD is terrified of "ethnic" hordes invading their school system if this is approved. And the RSD encourages their citizens to cry racism in the face of a tiny community that is only 60% caucasian."

Statements like the above are basically race-baiting and are inappropriate.

Definition of "race baiting": The act of using racially derisive language, actions, OR OTHER FORMS OF COMMUNICATION in order to anger or intimidate OR COERCE. (emphasis mine).


"In the middle are the families of a tiny section of The Willows that was already transferred to Menlo Park many many years ago."

1) But the families with MPCSD-age children in the "tiny section of The Willows" were most certainly not a part of the transfer at the time of the transfer. Having current elementary/middle-school age children born before 1983 is a biological impossibility. You're not in "the middle" of anything. You purchased a home knowing it was in Menlo Park, and knowing it was in the Ravenswood School District. There was no deception, you made a choice.

2) You act like having Menlo Park children attending Ravenswood is unique, but it's definitely not. The city of Menlo Park is part of 3 school districts: Las Lomitas, Menlo Park City, and Ravenswood. Even if the petitioners are transferred to MPCSD, many Menlo Park children will still be attending Ravenswood.

Being both in Menlo Park and in Ravenswood is not unique to the petitioners, at all.


4 people like this
Posted by lessons learned
a resident of Menlo Park: Felton Gables
on May 5, 2015 at 5:24 pm

lessons learned is a registered user.

Some of you are referring to elections for the MPCSD board. You should be aware that members of this board are handpicked and elected by default; there is no actual election. So they really don't have to answer to anyone.


16 people like this
Posted by Jeff
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on May 6, 2015 at 7:09 am

@Deep Throat.

Ever sat in a public meeting and had speaker after speaker accuse you of being a racist ? Ever try to speak and be jeered by a crowd calling you a racist ? All the while no one from the board denounces the behavior ? The race card was played. I am calling it out. Spare me your moral indignation.

Let's define inappropriate.... "deep throat".... really ? Pick a new handle though. Otherwise, I may change mine to "Donkey Punch".

I don't have children. I bought my house knowing it had RSD - that is correct. So I must be a racist then ? I must be motivated by money then ? These are the two reaons attributed by MPSD and RSD to the petitioners' motive for wanting the move. They have used lawyers, cooked up numbers and lies to try to make their case. My house valuation has doubled in 5 years. Not from the schools... but because of the location variables driving valuations right now. Would having MPSD school division improve the valuation ? Perhaps.... but maybe the maximum increases the market will bear are already in effect thanks to other variables ? If I had children, I would not be sending them to a failed school anways. If I can afford to buy into this market I most certanly have the means to pay for private schools.

Perhaps RSD board members should be crafting a plan for improving their academic rating ? Perhaps the parents should stop crying that rich racists are taking money from them and put some of that effort into their school. Instead of spending all their time playing politics, what is their plan to help the kids that are stuck with a failed public school system ? Maybe the folks from MPSD can spend some time to help them.

Thanks for heads up about the election process. The fact that I do not have kids would suggest I need to do some research in my efforts to hold these board members accountable.


11 people like this
Posted by Kim Chun
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on May 6, 2015 at 8:52 am

This is an important petition to improve children's education opportunities and strengthen our community. Sharing accurate data and honest opinions are very much appreciated, however, please use your real name and neighborhood. We want to trust the source of information as community members and not hired hecklers.


10 people like this
Posted by JohnBrady Barksdale
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on May 6, 2015 at 12:15 pm

As one of the Chief Petitioners driving this initiative forward I have found sever inconsistencies with the arguments with the different school districts stances. Besides the obvious misconstrued facts I have seen them present (as evident that both school districts can not come up with the same numbers based on the same facts (i.e. # of students, house prices, students lost-gained,budget impacts) the main ones that are continued to be brought up are:

RACE:
RVCSD wants more diversity in their school district although our strip of 31 Homes is made up more than 60% non-Caucasian residents and kids so wouldn't that increase their lack of diversity numbers or at the minimum keep the diversity the same if one Caucasian and one Minority enter the school? MPCSD is over 65% Caucasian so why are they not seeing this as an opportunity to bring more diversity to their school districts. Both school districts are talking about race, but neither school district can agree that in one we are increasing or keep the diversity numbers the same (RCSD) and the other we are in fact helping them with their lack of diversity (MPCSD).

PROPERTY VALUES:
The State of California on School District Code #35753 states: "The property reorganization is not primarily designed to result in a significant increase in property values causing financial advantage to property owners because territory was transferred from one school district to an adjoining school district." We are not saying our Property values will go up although we see it quite negible as Property values are a all-time high again. Yet, the analysis from RCSD seeing potential increase of 20% and MPCSD seeing an potential increase of 40% (very interesting comps being used, but our research using homes that the Independent Contractor (hired by San Mateo Board of Education Committee used for a previous hearing) show negligible comps. The fact no one is saying(unless you read the full petition) is that "the reorganization is not primarily designed to result in a significant increase in property values." My house has increased in value over the years and increased over the years as we all have in the Peninsula in fact EPA has seen an increase in 75% over the last 2 years) so we why wouldn't have we sold during the last 2 bubbles we have seen not to mention the FaceBook micro-bubble that the Willows has seen if we were looking for a quick buck. yes people will eventually sell, but will we see a max exodus of 31 homes to sell to make a quick buck?

Number of Students:
Again we are talking about 31 homes with currently 6 school aged children across multiple grades. RCSD has conceded 1 (one) student in the years since our 31 homes were brought into Menlo Park (1983) attending the RCSD , yet they are complaining of loss of students being an huge impact. MPCSD has claimed that we have the potential based on other averages and SGR numbers that we could grow that number by 12-15 students. Yet, the city has approved the build of 2 multi-unit (200+ each) complexes that will no doubt increase the strain more than our 31 homes of 6 students will ever do. Kids will come and go, but 31 homes "should" never have a huge impact compared other build-outs or full sub-divsion of homes.


12 people like this
Posted by palo alto resident
a resident of another community
on May 6, 2015 at 12:53 pm

I just think its weird that the dividing line goes down the middle of the street! School are also about building communities, have one street go to two different communities of schools is just odd.


3 people like this
Posted by palo alto resident
a resident of another community
on May 6, 2015 at 3:01 pm

It also looks like the line is down the middle of the street too. So I understand school lines have to be drawn somewhere, but these homes seem to be in Menlo Park (not EPA)...can someone confirm that?... and do not have homes behind them that are also in Menlo Park in the same situation making their argument less effective if they are really 31 of X number of homes.


12 people like this
Posted by Deep Throat
a resident of Hillview Middle School
on May 6, 2015 at 3:48 pm

"I just think its weird that the dividing line goes down the middle of the street!"

Dividing lines, for school districts or towns, going down the middle of roads are everywhere. There's nothing weird about it.

Fair Oaks Ave: one side is MPCSD, the other side is RWCSD;
Atherton Ave: one side is MPCSD, the other side is RWCESD;
Orange Ave: one side is MPCSD, the other side is LLESD;
Selby Lane: one side is LLESD, the other side is RWCESD;
Stockbridge Ave: one side is LLESD, the other side is RWCESD;
Cam Al Lago: one side is MPCSD, the other side is LLESD;


Web Link


The above examples are 1 street with different school districts on each side. But even within a school district, kids on one side of a street can end up going to a different school than kids on the other side of the street. Even Palo Alto does this. Here is the PAUSD map. As you can see, kids on 1 side of a street can end up going to a different school than the other side of the street:

Web Link

There is nothing unusual about a school boundary going down the middle of a street.


9 people like this
Posted by Deep Throat
a resident of Hillview Middle School
on May 6, 2015 at 4:30 pm

"MPCSD has claimed that we have the potential based on other averages and SGR numbers that we could grow that number by 12-15 students."

The "average" you're referring to is the average child per household MPCSD applies to the Willows neighborhood. You and your fellow petitioners have gone on at length about how you are part of the Willows neighborhood. The neighborhood's MPCSD capacity estimate is .4 children per home. If the petitioners are objecting to applying .4 to these homes, then it would be hypocritical to claim to be in the Willows but object to being treated like every other Willows home for capacity planning purposes.

You should be happy they're applying the same ratio to these homes as the rest of the Willows; it's a small concession that these homes are a part of the Willows.

.4 * 31 homes is 12.4 average children for 31 homes. +/- 10% leaves about 11-14 children for 31 homes in the Willows. Their estimate of 10-15 isn't unreasonable.


"Yet, the city has approved the build of 2 multi-unit (200+ each) complexes"

Red herring.

MPCSD has no voting power for approving or denying new construction. If MPCSD did, those complexes likely wouldn't be built (without major concessions, like building another school).


17 people like this
Posted by Jeff
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on May 6, 2015 at 8:50 pm

@Deep Throat.... how's that whole "inappropriate" line of accusations working for you ? Do you really need a definition to understand how inappropriate your handle is ?

Pot, meet kettle....

Do any of the dividing lines you spoke of down the middle of a street also have houses on the dividing line backing onto multi family dwellings with 8' fences?

Have you even bothered to walk down O'Connor Street to understand the physcial layout ? To understand the physical isolation from the apartment complexes behind the houses in question ? To get how the residents on O'Connor are truly a community on this street ? The O'Connor Street situation is significantly different than the consistent architecture of the other streets you cite which is one of the many reasons why this case is unique. I should also point out that most of the streets you reference are major roads with heavy traffic. The communities of neighbors lie behind the main street - not across the street from each other as is the case with O'Connor.

I invite you and the other board members to walk our neighborhood and see for yourselves. This might help you get a clue for the sense of community that does exist.... not the perverse view of isolationist racists and money grubbing property owners you apparently have.

I know change is an alien concept.... but try it. You are twisting the facts to try to suit your contention instead of understanding the facts to make a determination of how and why this petition and situation is truly unique.

Happily I note you have moved on from trying to defend the ridiculous lies of property value estimates & the race card issue. You are now trying to shift the argument to - this is all business as usual and busy streets are the same as neighborhood streets... but thanks for showing up and helping to make the case for The Willows.

Excitedly awaiting your next attempt to twist the facts.

Really would like you to change your handle but I understand the need to be anonymous when you are peddling so much BS.


Jeff


13 people like this
Posted by Deep Throat
a resident of Hillview Middle School
on May 6, 2015 at 10:41 pm

"@Deep Throat...."

Hi Jeff! Welcome back! How are you?


"how's that whole "inappropriate" line of accusations working for you ?"

It's working out great! Thanks for asking. That's very kind of you to ask. I think the racial makeup of the petitioners should be irrelevant, and think that the race baiting you and the Ravenswood folks have brought up is counterproductive.

I'm so glad to see you took my constructive criticism so well.


"Do you really need a definition to understand how inappropriate your handle is ?"

I already know the definition of Deep Throat. Here's the definition: this was the code name for the insider informant, as part of the Watergate scandal. For more information read wikipedia here: Web Link

[Part removed. Please avoid disparaging comments about other posters.]

"Do any of the dividing lines you spoke of down the middle of a street also have houses on the dividing line backing onto multi family dwellings with 8' fences? "

The petitioners and others have been focused on the fact the MPCSD/RSD border is down the middle of the street, implying this is unusual.

I have successfully refuted the uniqueness of mid-street school district boundaries. It is not unusual, at all.


"Have you even bothered to walk down O'Connor Street to understand the physcial(sic) layout ?"

Yep, irrelevant to mid-street school boundaries.


"To understand the physical isolation from the apartment complexes behind the houses in question ?"

Yep, irrelevant to mid-street school boundaries.


"To get how the residents on O'Connor are truly a community on this street ?"

Yep, irrelevant to mid-street school boundaries.


"The O'Connor Street situation is significantly different than the consistent architecture of the other streets you cite which is one of the many reasons why this case is unique."

ARCHITECTURE? Are you joking? You seriously think the transfer's valid because of architecture?

And, what do you know about the architecture of the streets I previously referenced? (not that that's relevant, but you brought it up, not me)


"I should also point out that most of the streets you reference are major roads with heavy traffic."

Orange is a major road? Please. Selby Lane? Please. Stockbridge? Please. Cam Al Lago? Please. The traffic on these roads are easily less than O'Connor. Even Atherton and Fair Oaks hardly qualify as "major".

You're grasping at straws.

"The communities of neighbors lie behind the main street - not across the street from each other as is the case with O'Connor.

I invite you and the other board members to walk our neighborhood and see for yourselves. This might help you get a clue for the sense of community that does exist...."

I believe you. And this factors into school boundaries going down the middle of a street...how exactly?

You're muddying the waters. School district boundaries going down the middle of a street is not unusual, at all.


"not the perverse view of isolationist racists "

More race baiting from you. Your participation in the conversation is counterproductive.

Definition of "race baiting": The act of using racially derisive language, actions, OR OTHER FORMS OF COMMUNICATION in order to anger or intimidate OR COERCE. (emphasis mine).


"and money grubbing property owners you apparently have."

Wait. You want to...JOIN...a group that has (in your words) "money grubbing property owners." I think your interest in joining a group that you think is money grubbing says a lot more about you than anything else.

Oh, and you want to...JOIN...a group that you claim has "isolationist racists". You like to hang with...interesting crowds.

"I know change is an alien concept.... but try it."

And you know this is alien...how?


"You are twisting the facts to try to suit your contention instead of understanding the facts to make a determination of how and why this petition and situation is truly unique. "

After the numerous statements you've made, this is ironic.

School boundaries down the middle of a street is not unique.

Menlo Park homes in Ravenswood schools is not unique.

That's not twisting facts, those ARE facts.


"Happily I note you have moved on from trying to defend the ridiculous lies of property value estimates & the race card issue."

I'm not going to request your post be removed by the moderator. But I want to be clear that what you just said is a LIE. You are playing the race card, not I, and none of my posts discuss property value estimates.


"You are now trying to shift the argument to - this is all business as usual and busy streets are the same as neighborhood streets"

Please, O'Connors traffic, on your best day, is comparable to Orange, Stockbridge, the section of Selby referenced earlier, and Cam Al Lago. And when Laurel opens, your traffic is going to be greater than those streets.

Please, your arguments are so easy to refute as to be laughable.


"Excitedly awaiting your next attempt to twist the facts. "

Ah, the irony!


"Really would like you to change your handle but I understand the need to be anonymous when you are peddling so much BS."

More irony.


16 people like this
Posted by Lash
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on May 7, 2015 at 8:44 am

Lash is a registered user.

For some strange reason I had to change my user name as "Jeff" was apparently now claimed by someone else. But hurray... yes, it is me. Let's play !

As for your arguments....sigh, where do I start.... how about with the name.... one more time.

Definition of Deep Throat. If you read more thoroughly about how and why the name "Deep Throat" was selected as the code name for Mark Felt you will begin to see how disengenuous your claims are. It was used as the code name because of a movie by the same title that was popular at that time. The reason that movie was dubbed "Deep Throat" was.... yes.... I knew you would get it. We are making progress here... or is it just that I have a dirty mind ? I think that is what you implied last time.

There are two uses of the term. One is "informal" and is specifically defined as "a person who anonymously supplies information about covert or illegal action in the organization where they work." The other official (read "formal") definition of Deep Throat is a verb and I won't bother to post it. [Part removed. Please post your comments without disparaging remarks about other posters.]

[Part removed. Please post your comments without speculating about the identity of another poster.]

Let's get to work here though.

1. Architecture. According to California law, yes architecture is an element in the definition of "community".

2. Street traffic.... do you have any traffic studies to supprt your claims ? You speak of future traffic problems as well. Please, share with everyone the traffic studies you have.

3. Yes, all the streets you name are very different from O'Connor. I have driven all those streets and there is a total and complete lack of community on all those streets for different reason. Whether they are fronted by a main thoroughfare or are gated homes without a community feel like a middle class neighborhood - they are very different from O'Connor. So thank you again for highlighting why O'Connor Street is different.

4. Now for my favorite...race baiting. You failed to answer my second post about the ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims made at the RSD hearing. Race is a significant part of the counter arguments by both boards. You seem to be admitting in your post that the RSD did use the race card and is race baiting ? Is that the official position of the MPSD you want to expose ? Clearly, race is part of this discussion. Clearly RSD has used the race card and allowed their meeting to be used as a forum for offensive and unfounded smearing of the petitioners. You can claim I am race baiting all you want. Race is a major part of the MPSD argument and you appear to acknowledge that RSD engaged in the race baiting. Therefore, I submit, I am not race baiting. I am calling it out. Especially in the face of the highly questionable calculations and data points used in their case against the petition. I submit that given the extraordinary effort to come up with fake numbers in support of fake arguments against the petition, that it leaves few explanations to well informed observer as to the real motivations.

5. My opinions and point of view do say a lot about me. As does my sense of irritation at the innuendos and false accusations implying greed, racism, perversion and arrogance. So yes, the fact that I object to being labeled greedy, a racist or a pervert does say something about me. Thank you for the compliment.

6. I am amused that you think my arguments are laughable. [Part removed. Please avoid disparaging comments about other posters.]
You dismiss those arguments that you can longer counter as being irrelevant and you imply my mind sees the perversion in names versus the clever (albeit incorrect) way you use the name.

You have missed an important aspect of the petitioner's position. If you ever bothered to walk our neighborhood on a Sunday morning for example, you will get a real sense for the community that does exist. Why else would people from the other side of the street come out to support this petition ? Why would they come out to hearings to brave insults, slurs and accusations when clearly all they have done is support their neighbors, their community.

I am amazed at the intellect, the caring and the raw courage of the team that lead this petition. [Part removed. Please avoid disparaging comments about other posters.]
I now see why they have had so much difficulty as they have been greeted by misinformed, biased and morally bankrupt bureaucracy...

I would like to apologize to my neighbors as they have taken the high road in their arguments. My sarcasm and "in your face" commentary in no way reflects their approach to this.

O'Connor is unique. We are part of Menlo Park. Had it not been for a bureaucratic err many years ago, you and I might be friends.

As it stands, there will be an election and O'Connor will move into MPSD.



Jeff







12 people like this
Posted by Not-Jeff
a resident of Hillview Middle School
on May 8, 2015 at 11:26 am

Not-Jeff is a registered user.

Dear editor/moderator,

I suspect they don't pay you enough to read through all this flotsam :)


Dear Jeff/Lash,

Your scary obsession with my previous handle and your predilections on your interpretations of it, compelled me to change it.


To be clear, these have been my points, provable by a review of previous comments:

1) race baiting is inappropriate.
Your responses make it clear you disagree. You continue to defend your behavior by effectively saying they (be it MPCSD or RSD) started it. Way to take the high road, Jeff.

2) families with MPCSD/RSD-age children on O'Connor knew what they were buying (RSD schools in Menlo Park) when they bought.
They were not duped or tricked into buying into the Ravenswood district. You've never directly responded to this point, only implying that these homes and the people in them are special snowflakes and should have special consideration. I understand why you'd take this tack, since my point is indisputable and correct.

3) Homes in Menlo Park with a Ravenswood assignment is not unusual, there are other homes in Menlo Park with the exact same assignment.
You've never directly responded to this point, only implying that these homes and the people in them are special snowflakes and should have special consideration. I understand why you'd take this tack, since my point is indisputable and correct.

4) There is nothing unusual about a school boundary going down the middle of a street.
I offered numerous examples from several school districts that have district boundaries going down the middle of the street, and even included links to various district maps, which show boundaries going down the middle of numerous streets.

His response was to ignore the obvious ("oh, gee wiz, these maps DO show that a lot of district boundaries are down the middle of streets. Oopsiees!"), and instead try to make the case that all roads that double as district boundaries are busier than O'Conner, without offering ANY proof that traffic is lighter on O'Conner than the other roads.

He then has the chutzpah to ask for proof of traffic on other roads. Jeff, you brought up traffic patterns, so you own proving your case.


Here's a brief response to some of your points above:

"1. Architecture."

Golly, you must be mad at your neighbors then, since home design wasn't included in the petition. Thankfully they have more common sense than you do.

"2. Street traffic.... do you have any traffic studies to supprt your claims ? You speak of future traffic problems as well. Please, share with everyone the traffic studies you have."

You are the one who initially made the case that O'Connor's traffic was different than all other roads used as district boundaries. You own proving it. Please, you're in way over your head.

"3. Yes, all the streets you name are very different from O'Connor...thank you again for highlighting why O'Connor Street is different. "

I did no such thing. Based on your response, I'm skeptical you've ever been down any of those roads; if you had you'd see how ridiculous your claims are.

And yes, you've made it quite clear you think these O'Connor homes and residents are special snowflakes requiring special treatment. We get it.

"4. Now for my favorite...race baiting. You failed to answer my second post about the ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims made at the RSD hearing."

You never asked me that question.

I've been clear that the race baiting by both you and RSD and/or the residents in that district is inappropriate. If you don't understand that sentence, there's not much I can do for you.

"5. My opinions and point of view do say a lot about me....Thank you for the compliment."

Pointing out your race baiting is not a complement. Responding to race baiting with race baiting is not admirable behavior.

"6. I am amused that you think my arguments are laughable. [Part removed. Please avoid disparaging comments about other posters.] You dismiss those arguments that you can longer counter as being irrelevant"

(hmmm, I wonder what you said?)

I didn't dismiss and call them irrelevant, I AGREED and called them irrelevant to the points being made.

Wow...seriously...I'm trying to not be insulting here (note to editor: seriously, the next sentence is not meant to slam him, I just don't know how to point this out in a more tactful way)...perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension a bit.

(note to editor: I welcome a more tactful way of stating that. I'm at a loss on how to make things clearer to him).


"As it stands, there will be an election and O'Connor will move into MPSD. "

Possibly, possibly not. It depends on if they reject outright, or approve a vote. I'd be surprise if they make the vote restricted to the 31 homes. And if RSD gets to vote, there's no chance the transfer will happen, IMHO.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Redwood City gets new brewery
By Elena Kadvany | 11 comments | 5,792 views

Learning Disabilities and the Struggle to Be Known
By Aldis Petriceks | 0 comments | 1,228 views

Couples: A Relationship Test . . .
By Chandrama Anderson | 3 comments | 917 views

Food Party! SOS
By Laura Stec | 4 comments | 740 views

Enjoy every configuration of your family
By Cheryl Bac | 4 comments | 487 views