Rhys is just stating facts. Of the 800 kids who attend St. HOPE, only 124 live in the 95817 zip code. It's a fact that the majority of Oak Park students go to either McClatchy or Johnson.

I think you may have the newly elected president of the board, Diana Rodriguez mixed up with Ellyne Bell. If I recall correctly, Ms. Rodriguez spoke and Ms. Bell did not weigh in on the issue. Not sure though...

"Most people drive by and say to themselves, "My kid is NOT going there" because they see so many minorities." Gonzo, it is very unfortunate that you have such a narrow way of thinking. For your information, for the first 5 years of its operation, St. HOPE had on its website, "our focus is on low-income, minority students". After I mentioned that statement at a board meeting and in the paper, people called me racist. All I was saying was that it was an exclusive statement and people were getting a particular message. Message received loud and clear - St. HOPE got what it wanted - a minority-focused school. They were the ones focusing on race, and it was wrong. In a December board meeting, the district directed St. HOPE to market their school in a more inclusive and legal way. That divisive statement was then removed from the website. The former Sac High had 146 years of history of eduacating all students. It was the most racially and socioeconomically balanced school in the district when it was closed. Why would 146 years of diversity disappear overnight? The lack of diversity is directly related to St. HOPE's previous marketing strategy and their continued assertions that their lack of diversity is because others are bigots (that doesn't encourage people to feel welcome there, by the way) - when in reality, St. HOPE got what they wanted all along.

MBD, I do have children. They are not high school-aged yet. I'm looking toward the future and what is best for the district in the long-run. I believe in community schools and I support educating every single child irregardless if they are going to college or not. I believe it is our civic duty to make sure every child gets a decent education. That's just what I believe and I fight for what I believe in. There's no hidden agenda. In my opinion, it's just the right thing to do. As you can see from many of these comments, many people aren't concerned with everyone and that frightens me to death. It's sad. See Disciple's comment to see what I mean.

Truthbtold: I Know that they are co-locating because of the renovation. It is no secret that Sac charter cannot afford their site without another entity there. The situation is temporary and is not a long-term solution. It helps defray the cost for St. HOPE. That's the truth.

Tom, I've explained it countless times. If you don't understand the facts and figures, well, there's nothing I can do to enlighten you. I would be happy if the district did the right thing for a change. That would make me extremely happy :)

Sactomom: I didn't waste my time trying to hand out flyers because there aren't enough programs or decent schools to keep people in the district - that is what the problem is. I don't have a scatter map of Sac High attendence but I do have the racial breakdown for the school year of 2000-01. It'll give you a general idea of who went to the school. I got the information from the CDE data quest. Asian 19.5%, Hispanic 26.2%, African American 19%, Caucasian 30.9%

It doesn't even come close to enough to make up for the loss of students out of the district. St. HOPE also has a very difficult time coming up with the rent - I'm sure you remember how they were in arrears to the district for over $1 Million. According to the inspector General, the feds think St. HOPE is nearly insolvent. The district has bailed St. HOPE out again and again by first allowing PS7 students to take up space on the campus, then they let adult ed share the space, and now the Met is sharing space - temporarily(sharing the space allows St. HOPE to not have to pay the full rent). St. HOPE absolutely cannot afford the campus without another entity co-locating with it. Even their middle schoolers will not be enough. If they were to move to the WC facility, they would then be able to afford it because it suits their size.

I gather you dislike people who live in East Sac. I know many people who lived in East Sac who sent their children to Sac High. There is a long history of people from all over sending their children there. Please don't group everyone into what you think East Sac families are. That's not fair. As I stated earlier, the vast majority of students who attend the two schools commute there. The same argument you make regarding the kids of the neighborhood could be made for the kids of Oak Park whose high school was closed down. I am just asking you to look at the bigger picture here. More kids have been affected by the closure of the public high school than the populations of WC and Sac Charter combined. Why is it everyone is forgetting those kids?

The district has explored all of those options. The district considers all the comprehensives to be at capacity (not actual physical capacity, but a number set to keep the comprhensives from growing too large) I was told this by the district when I submitted several questions for them to answer. The Fremont school does not meet earthquake standards for public school students. George Washington Carver serves many students who live near Rosemont High area - that is where most of their population resides. The MET is growing and has a small campus by Southside Park. They are currently co-locating with Sac Charter to help defray the cost of the facility for the charter school which clearly cannot afford the site.

The boundaries for the school, per consent decree, would be the former Sac High attendance area and would accept all students from KC and Sutter (within those attendance areas)as feeders.

As of April of this year, there are 124 students from 95817 who attend Sacramento charter high school. I asked this question of the board in March and this was the number they gave me. I do not have the numbers for PS7, but I do know that nearly half of their population resides out of the district- you can access this information on the SCUSD website under Nov 3rd board meeting enrollment numbers.

There are 300 out of district students who attend Sac Charter. Unfortunately, because it's an independent charter and not governed by the district, the ADA money gets paid directly to St. HOPE, not the district. As far as the out of district students who attend WC, the district does get paid for their attendance. I would seriously doubt that there would be high levels of out of district students in our SCUSD high schools because as stated earlier, they're not participating in general education open-enrollment. I gather there are some out of district students in the elite programs, but certainly not enough to counter the 624 lost.

Mr. Wilkinson, The Sac High campus was renovated to the tune of $24M for high school students. This money was allocated for the school when it was a community-focused high school. Both PS7 and Sac Charter have very high out of district populations. Per proposition 39, the district need only provide facilities for their in-district students - this is to ensure that facilities funded with district tax-payer dollars are adequately serving in-district children. It's the law.

Tom, I know you like to use this arguement, but if it were you, would you send your kids to such a struggling school that isn't near your home? This school has done significantly worse than the school that was closed (Sac High). How is that really helping the community that lost its school? How would switching campuses destroy two successful programs? The schools and their programs would remain intact. They're both commuter schools and are roughly two miles apart.

Instead of languishing on the waitlist like in years past, the students are now just leaving the district because the district has to let them go per the federal open-enrollment law. I know countless students who just decided to leave instead of waiting. They tried, they didn't get in, they left. It would be highly malfeasant of the board not to recognize this trend.

In response to your question, truthbtold: Last year, 624 students left the school district at the high school level to go to other school districts because they felt there wasn't a workable option for them. That's roughly $3 Million in lost revenue for the district. The district was court-ordered to open a replacement comprehensive high school for the old Sac High attendance area. $8 million was set aside to do so. If the district provides a feeder school for Sutter and KC, many of the students would most likely stay in the district and return money to the district. The students who want a successful comprehensive neighborhood high school that has all the bells and whistles many students want, do not have any options because all of the large comprehensive high schools are considered by the district to be at capacity. They are not accepting general education open-enrollment students. Something must be done to stop the hemmorhaging of students out of the district. Niche schools like WC and Sac Charter do well by the students who go there; however, the segregation of the few, from the many, does not serve to educate all. This isn't about closing either school, it's about relocating them and opening opportunities for more students. It's absolutely the district's job to consider all comers, motivated or not, English Language Learner or not, college-bound or not, special education or not.

Yes, the real Sac High has pumped out a lot of smarties :)

Yay! Congrats Marion :)

Tom, I'm not trying to destroy two successful programs. Swapping the sites would keep the schools intact. Sac charter cannot afford the site they're on and if they're unable to sustain themselves financially, then they are in danger of losing their charter. "you should work to make Hiram Johnson--the comprehensive high school that serves East Sac---a better school." How do you propose I do this? Many families from both West and Sac Charter didn't try to improve HJ. They opted out. They just got lucky because they were able to get into the elite programs. It's very easy to Monday-morning-quarterback on this issue because those who propose I make HJ better usually aren't faced with this very personal decision themselves. It's hard to make your kids the guiney pigs for this change. When none of your friends or neighbors go to the school, and you don't live near it, it's hard to feel connected to it. HJ has had so many problems...not enough staff to adequately serve students, a huge upheaval in the administration and staff, gang problems, and poor program performance. HJ has historically done worse the the old Sac High did. The district reassigned people to a school that was doing worse than the one they closed. It made no sense. As far as inter-district transfers, the district's hands are tied. NCLB requires the district to allow students to leave the district if they cannot provide a non-PI comprehensive hs. All of the hs with the exception of West and Kennedy are or have been in PI. The district has small hs, but many of them are in PI as well and are not considered an appropriate replacement per the law. I hate seeing the loss of ADA money as well, that's why I am supportive of the swap. WC stays intact, St. HOPE stays intact, and the option for the court-ordered traditional public high school can be made a reality- to keep kids from leaving the district. The site is two completely seperate wings so so co-locating a traditional hs in one wing would really have no effect on West other than increase their financial strength, and fully utilize the site for in-district high school students. The smaller WC facility would increase St. HOPE's financial strength. It just makes sense. I don't see any other option.