Just when I was starting to feel a teensy, weensy bit optimistic that the LAUSD board had finally knocked some sense into itself, I open the LA Times this morning and read this:
Despite a state law that seeks to prevent schools from being built near freeways and mounting evidence that road pollutants harm children’s lungs, the Los Angeles Unified School District is in the process of adding seven new schools to the more than 70 already located close to highways.
Okay, let me get this straight. A state law passed in 2003 specifically prohibits public school districts from building campuses within 500 feet of a freeway “unless the district can mitigate the pollution or determines that space limitations are so severe that there are no other options.” The district already has 70 such campuses. So the board’s reaction is…..
…To build more of them?
According to the Times, the reason LAUSD officials have decided to build additional schools in unhealthy locations is because…. the district’s “choices have become more and more limited.”
Oh, well, gee, then it’s perfectly okay. By the way, does this mean that those same officials will be willing to send their own kids (or grandkids) to one of these freeway-close campuses?
Right. I didn’t think so.
It could be worse, I guess. I mean what’s a little freeway pollution compared to building a school on a site loaded with toxic contaminates (cough-Belmont-cough). But, when multiple new studies show that kids going to schools near major thoroughfares are more likely to suffer from asthma and/or bronchitis, and with childhood asthma already alarmingly on the rise according to the CDC, particularly among inner city kids, then pushing that envelope still further doesn’t seem all that….you know…. smart.
Or kid friendly.
The deeper you read into the article, the more your want to start banging your head against the nearest hard surface.
For instance, when Angelo Bellomo, the head of district’s Office of Environmental Health and Safety, analyzed the two newest freeway-close schools in the works, he found “….both suffered from significant pollution and recommended three steps to mitigate damaging effects: air filtering, reduced outdoor activity when air quality is particularly bad and a 200-foot buffer from the freeway.”
In other words, kids at these schools will experience few adverse health effects as long as they remain inside the school’s air-filtered classrooms, never go outside for recess, or play any kind of outdoor sports. Heck. Sure. That works!
He said that if the school board wants to build on the edge of a freeway anyway, it will have to find that the benefits outweigh the health risks.
“It would be very difficult to justify such a finding,” Bellomo said. “We are trying to do a better job dissuading the real estate agents from even looking at properties that are close.”
Great. No wonder we have gang problems on our campuses. The LAUSD folks can’t even get their real estate agents to behave.
Anyway, read the article. Tell me what you think.
I think that liberals are running our of causes when they resort to silly outrages.
The fact that most of the hillside communities of L A have no school for their kids, even though the average home goes from over a million to many times that, is what is the outrage. As I’ve pointed out, there are literally a few elementary schools for the area that go through fifth grade — overcrowded as it is, no way anyone even across the street from the boundaries could get their kid in — and no middle or highschools, since those all consist of kids buses in. The amount these disenfranchised people pay for schools all over town they can’t use, is the real outrage. “Would they send their own kids to these schools?” near freeways?
The implication that the people footing the huge bills are “lucky” is just plain wrong, and one big reason the middle and upper middle classes are leaving or gone — some to the west valley, where ironically housing is cheaper, or out of the city altogether. Not all of these people can pay the over twenty thousand a year for private school, for which competition is fierce. But I’ve never ONCE heard a sympathetic response from Celeste or any other ultra-liberal about this, because to them, this sort of virtual socialism of fleece-the-haves (even if they don’t really have) is as it should be. Where is the protest, the activism, here?
This sort of disenfranchisement seriously hurts the city as a whole, and as I keep saying, is a big reason few wealthier families care what’s happening in LAUSD except as a tax drain. Change this disenfranchisement, and watch LAUSD dramatically improve. Give US those seven wasted schools, and see what could be done with them. (No big yards? As long as the indoors are as state-of-the art, they’d still get takers, believe me.) Stop wasting the megamillions on schools that become objects of complaint, LAUSD! Look at the areas which don’t have LOCALLY ATTENDED schools, and do something about them. Adding this dynamic population will do more to improve ALL the schools, than all the internal bickering among old and new Boards has for decades.
P. S. By “hillside areas,” I mean ALL the way from Nichols Canyon, maybe further east, to Bel Air, Brentwood and the Palisades (where Paul Revere/Pali High are not even guaranteeing locals admission anymore, due to crowding). The area has literally 2-3 locally attended SMALLER K-5 schools total.
Woody, you continue to show that any topic still brings you to Liberals, it’s pretty sad. Smog in Schools =Liberals, Jena 6=Liberals even Starbucks=Liberals. I wonder if the cars liberals drive on the freeways create more smog?
Celeste the downtown and central L.A. is so densely populated it took years to acquire the land for some of those freeway close schools. Imagine if you added the requirement of building far from freeways? Reminds me of a school site debate I was listening to, some of the complaints about different sites were.
1)Don’t build there the kids have to cross the railroad tracks
2)Don’t build there the kids have to cross a major street.
3)Don’t build there, too many warehouses and large trucks
4)Don’t build there and using any our of existing Park land.
5)Don’t build there too many gangs close by.
6)Don’t build there is too close to an industrial plant.
7)Don’t build there it is too far for the kids to walk.
8)Don’t build there we have lived around here 30 years.
My friend who was a CAD designer on the project loved this, he worked three years on the same school drawing on different sites and remained gainfully employed on this “temp†assignment.
Maggie, I never heard those areas had a school shortage but I guess that just demonstrates your point of contention. I am more familiar with L.A. central and the “real” Foothill communities of the San Gabriel Valley, who don’t have those problems but are not part of LAUSD. And so far the only ones “complaining” are an L.A Times reporter and Celeste. I have not heard complaints from others yet, but this story was just reported on the morning news.
After reviewing Google Maps of the area (just South of USC), I find that this particular location is about the only logical place to put a school in the neighborhood, unless you use eminent domain to evict and tear down homes of several hundred low income families.
http://tinyurl.com/22sflq (switch to hybrid mode – zoom in)
That said, the demand for more schools is driven by (mostly Hispanic) immigrant population, which often has 12 people in a three bedroom apartment.
Because of this population surge of large Hispanic families, the schools which served this previously mostly black neighborhood for 50 years are now over-whelmed.
New schools must be built or we must enforce our immigration laws, or we must enforce our occupancy laws.
I wonder how many smog-less schools we could have built with all the money Bush wasted in Iraq?
To be fair LAUSD has a real problem finding school sites in an are like LA where NIMBYs roam the land and every proposed site is going to be the scene of a major land-use battle – not to mention eminent domain tussle.
L.A. Resident, of course, in your response you are playing off of my comment in another post to you where I said that the left can transform any topic into something about Iraq. (“Jena=Iraq, Schools=Iraq, Dodgers=Iraq.”) It’s true.
So, what do you do here? You make the statement, “I wonder how many smog-less schools we could have built with all the money Bush wasted in Iraq?” What a laugh for you to reinforce my point.
At least my comment is pertinent in that Celeste is a liberal and makes posts about subjects that seem to bother other liberals.
Celeste, I think you have a better chance of finding housing for a sex offender away from schools than you do for placing schools away from freeway smog. I have more concern for bears and alligators than this topic.
Pokey wrote: “That said, the demand for more schools is driven by (mostly Hispanic) immigrant population….”
Well, that presents an interesting problem. Liberals want illegal immigrants to have all the rights of our citizens, and then complain when desperate steps are taken to accomondate the same illegals. Maybe we can blame liberals for forcing these kids to go to school near pollutants.
Maggie, I live in one of those areas you’re talking about that feeds Revere, Pali and Taft. And this is the first time I’ve heard the not-enough-schools complaint.
People complain (rightly) about the quality of the schools, about the miserably over-crowded classrooms, burned out teachers, the tense racial balkanization among the student body that the busing produces….and stuff like that. As a consequence, as you said, there are more than just a few families that end up moving because they don’t want their kids in an LAUSD school but can’t afford the $20 grand a year for a private school.
But the saddest part of it all is that these schools—as screwed up as they often are— are the “really, really good” schools in the district. Whatever their problems, they honestly don’t come close to the problems of the problem schools in East and South LA like Jefferson, Locke, Santee, Crenshaw…etc. etc..
This in no way excuses the district’s poor performance in those higher property-tax areas. But if you think LAUSD is failing there, take a little drive across town.
As a mom, I was driven completely, frothing mad by LAUSD when my now-21-year old was of school age. Then more recently, as a reporter, I began researching the South LA schools, and….the rage transformed into nonstop hysteria.
Also, RLC is right, there’s a major NIMBY issue with school sites in general, but particularly in the areas you’re talking about.
Where I agree with you is about general lack of outrage about the school system among a lot of liberal editors and reporters (until recently when it has become more fashionable), because an awful lot of them have their kids in private schools.
*********
Guys, this is the first I’ve heard of this issue too, but do we just figure the state law, the research, and the obvious discomfort on the part of the head of district’s Office of Environmental Health and Safety….is all just a bunch of crap?
Woody if you own a dictionary, look-up the words sarcasm and hypocritical the later refers to a Woodpecker with a tweaked beak and the other a laughing liberal. Hurry up Woody I see a laughing liberal under you bed.
L.A. Resident, as everyone knows, liberals have no sense of humor and, therefore, are incapable of sincere laughter. Go back to saving the world.
Celeste, can’t believe you haven’t heard that complaint, but then you live in Topanga, you said. The lack of schools is ALL people talk about when moving to the area with kids, or in preschool where the private school struggle starts already in earnest. If you live east of Benedict Canyon, kids are sent down to We Ho Elementary, then a little further east to a school called Gardner in the rough flats of Hollywood, where it’s all gangs, and the “white” kids are immigrants from Russia and Armenia, who fall into their own gangs, and their parents are either struggling immigrants or not infrequently associated with the Russian mafia. NO ONE goes there from the hills, for very valid reasons. There’s no pretense even to educate. Same every place down the line. And for the handful who to go Wonderland or Warner, where do you think they go for middle and high school? They are desperate for private schools then — which is why these people usually try to get into the private school system in elem. school anyway. Do you know how few spots there are for kids entering the private school system in 6th grade? As a result, the rest go to Catholic, parochial, anywhere they can get in. Ever been to Emerson Middle, Uni High (or Fairfax or Hollywood high, which “serve” the expensive homes in the hills)? I don’t know what social world you live in, because this is ALL anyone talks about, all the way to the Palisades. I think your son is out of the public school system now, but it’s been in all the papers who locals have been officially told by Pali Schools/LAUSD not to count on admission.
Even those who think it’s just peachy for this entire group to be disenfranchised, can admit that whenever the affluent segment participates in anything, it improves overall, and when it doesn’t, things are neglected (schools being a unique case, and of course mass transit over the years).”
This situation also mitigates against communities bonding, with parents driving their kids often 30-60 mins. each way to school. And how does that impact traffic, quality of life? Parents with 2-3 kids have to both work and leave the kids with nannies to afford the schools, or, as my neighbors did when having a second child, and the mom (a wellpaid Century City attorney) wanted to be with the kids more, quit and moved to Palos Verdes where the schools are good.
It wouldn’t exactly be hard to address this, it’s the most open “dirty little secret” out there. But in my experience, the libs who get worked up over other issues at LAUSD reply, “Well, if you don’t want to send the kids to the schools they’re assigned to, you’re just racist.” It’s definitely a deliberate and political blindness, in my opinion. I’ll bet if the Times started playing it up one tenth as they did the Mayor’s affair with Mirthala, something could get done.
P. S. As for the NIMBYism in these areas: that would be less likely to be the case, or disappear, IF the schools being built would be for the locals, not more bused-in kids, but that isn’t something that can be assumed or counted on. There is a school in the Bel Air Hills on Bellagio Rd., for example, called Bellagio Road School — but who goes there? It’s for recent immigrants, and specializes in ESL programs. Fine idea but not when you’re taking away the only school in that area for locals, who therefore struggle to get into and pay for the Thomas Dye School nearby. The Roscomare Road School DOES cater to locals, and virtually everyone in the hood does go there. If there are any spots available, there is a lottery — where, of course, whites are way below in “points” to anyone of color, so forget it, not a chance.
And what do the parents in the school do for 6th grade? Yeah, scramble in desperation, same dance or move away.
The reply that well, there are worse schools in South and East L A somehow is just insane, if you extrapolate it to a national level, or even anywhere other than this “rich” area. Every listing in the MLS mentions the school and its test scores; low scores (which mean, no one from the area goes here, it’s a bused-in population) are “don’t move here, or have you picked out your private schools yet? Unless you are one of the ultra-libs who think your own child is a social experiment, you won’t send them to a dangerous, poorly ranked school. (Even though many parents are MORE likely to embrace “diversity” than say in Newport Harbor.)
Woody Wood-Pecker is just upset because the GOP is going to get their asses handed to them in 08. The Republican’s nightmare of a women running the Republican controlled circus show is unacceptable. Especially a women that has a bitchy attitude and will kick you in the nuts ASAP. I love that women.
It’s not women who scare me. Margaret Thatcher was a fine PM. It’s socialists who don’t care about truth or the rule of law who concern me. But, try, as hard as it may seem to you, LAR, to stay on topic.
Maggie, you better tell your friends and neighbors to jump on my bandwagon. Ride Mr. Secession to smaller government and better management of your city services and tax dollars.
Maggie, you’re on a pretty serious rant here and I certainly don’t know anything about the quantity of schools in your area, but just reading your posts it sounds like your real complaint is about the quality of the schools. Aren’t you saying that there are only a few available schools that are GOOD and the rest suck?
And by the way, only 4 out of a total of 23 points have anything to do with race so the idea that all the whites are getting beat our by minorities is ridiculous. Plus, parents with more money, time and education (that’s more often white parents) are able to more effectively play the points game. In addition, some have viewed magnet schools as the best hope for keeping white, affluent kids in the LAUSD system.
Another by the way, isn’t Maggie describing some kind of terrible and impossible market failure? Parents with money can’t find private schools to accept their kids, and no enterprising educators want to start a school and fill that market need? Again, I’m guessing the complaint is about quality (or reputation) and not quantity.
Mavis, money is being wasted on building schools where they’re not wanted, and there are areas where enrollment has declined so the schools are being closed. Meanwhile, the wealthiest areas, which pay the most taxes, have no local schools to send the local kids to. That simple. You’re clearly one of those who think too bad, send your kids to whatever schools they’re “assigned” to despite the fact that it’s a different demographic. As I said again and again, when there IS a local school, people use them and volunteer. Darned right this is a “rant.” It’s a scandal.
Hard to take, the deflation of the belief (no, religion) that “the rich have the good schools,” isn’t it? That’s the fallacy that keeps the left going and full of outrage at the perceived “injustices” that always and only affect people of color. Damn the ones paying the large bulk of the taxes — that’s how things are “supposed” to be. If they have to move or scramble for private schools, so be it. Your last para. re: Parents with money can’t find private schools to accept their kids” is intentionally blind and biased. Why would parents have to scramble for these private schools if we had decent ones like everywhere else in modest middle class neighborhoods, like Porter Ranch, Calabasas, or most neighborhoods in Irvine? If public schools did their job and didn’t exclude a huge demographic, private schools wouldn’t have to fill the entire gap.
maggie Says: Mavis, money is being wasted on building schools where they’re not wanted
Please elaborate, who does not want the new schools?
And isn’t the building of the new schools in the poor areas going to eliminate the need for busing into the wealthiest areas?
Eric Garcetti, for one, declined a new school in his district recently due to falling enrollment. There are a number of other cases I’ve read about and don’t have time to re-research, you can google or contact LAUSD.
Second para typical liberal whitewash, irrelevant to the facts. Building more schools in the inner cities while not building any for the wealthier areas (since the 70’s, that’s been considered an “elitist” notion) can’t work because there ARE NO SCHOOLS for the entire hillsides from Franklin/ Beachwood Canyon to Brentwood, EXCEPT A HANDFUL OF ELEM. K-5 schools. All the existing schools in the flats of the westside are 80-90% ethnic and bused in, and their numbers are not declining. These areas are desirable draws because there’s a perception that the schools are better than where the kids are coming from. THERE WILL NEVER BE SCHOOLS FOR THE PEOPLE WHO PAY THE HUGE BULK OF WESTSIDE TAXES UNLESS THEY ARE BUILT, and with a policy of preference for locals, no busing (unless there’s extra room, which is unlikely once word gets out). Second preference would have to be other neighboring areas not in the immed. borders of the schools, but that never happens under current policy.
Try a little high school journalism experiment: Call realtors who represent the hills, tell them you are looking for a house in the only $1.5 million dollar range, and you’d like to know what they have with “good schools.” E.g., Warner, Roscomare. Then ask about living in the Coldwater Canyon area, or Sunset Plaza/Doheny Estates, and ask about schools. They’ll tell you about West Hollywood Elem., strongly look at you askance if you’re even considering it. Ask about virtually every hillside community east and west: to the east, I’ve described above, and east of Fairfax the expensive homes have even worse. To the west, there are small pockets of ELEM schools only, no middle or h. s. (Warner, Roscomare, Rustic Canyon — which feeds into Pali schools if there’s room). Older people talk of the days before busing when their kids went to those schools (like Emerson and Uni High — which have also been infiltrated by gangs, and I’ve read that Uni is the kind of place where a lot of effort goes into the teaching and maintenance, but bathroom stalls are graffiti-d and ripped off, you get the idea), but after that, when the middle class moved to the valley, a new group of kids came in and they’re staying.
Everyone in this price range knows what a disaster the lack of school options are, so of course, does LAUSD. But people in these areas are so shut out of the system, they don’t have interest or time in doing what I’m doing here: trying to inject some reality and balance into the discussion. It becomes an insular, competitive community of those “in the know.”
Even if you have only social disdain for “the rich” who can afford such homes (usually they’re older parents who have put off having kids and sacrificed or bought a while ago), you have to admit it’s very poor (disastrous) social policy to refuse to provide schools for this demographic and force the private school system to fill in the entire gap. That may sound like an extreme statement, and it is. It’s the American Dream that once you obtain the nice house you should have at least decent schools to look forward to, and your kids should go to school with others in their neighborhood. Without this, the social contract and fiber of community are broken. (I know that sounds corny, but it’s very true.)
If anyone poses as a buyer in the hills to check this out, I’d be curious as to your report. Seriously eye-opening.
Yes, I’ve gone on here (and really don’t have the time), but I think it may be the single biggest failure in L A today.
The LAUSD has a reputation for extremely crowded schools, poor maintenance and incompetent administration. Bond issues and ambitious renovation programs have not uniformly eased these conditions.[1] As part of its school-construction project, LAUSD opened two high schools (Santee Education Complex, South East) in 2005 and four high schools (Arleta, Contreras Learning Complex, Panorama, and East Valley) in 2006 [3] [4]. By 2012, over 160 schools will have been constructed, expanded, or completely refurbished.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Unified_School_District
List of Los Angeles Unified School District schools
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Los_Angeles_Unified_School_District_schools
High Schools to be opened
Helen Bernstein High School (Opening Fall 2008 [29])
Central Los Angeles High Area School 9 (Opening 2008 [30] [31])
Central Los Angeles High School 11 (Belmont Learning Center) (Opening 2008 [32])
Central Los Angeles High School 12 (Opening 2009 [33])
Central Region High School 13 (Opening 2011 [34])
Central Region High School 15 (Opening 2012 [35])
Central Region High School 16 (Opening 2011 [36])
East Los Angeles New High School 1 (Opening 2009 [37])
East Valley New High School 1A (Opening 2008 [38])
South Los Angeles Area High School 3 (Opening 2012 [39])
South Region High School 2 (Opening 2011 [40])
South Region High School 4 (Long Beach, Opening 2011 [41])
South Region High School 6 (Opening 2011 [42])
South Region High School 7 (Huntington Park, Opening 2011 [43])
South Region High School 9 (South Gate, Opening 2012 [44])
South Region High School 12 (Opening 2012 [45])
South Region High School 13 (Opening 2012 [46])
South Region High School 14 (Opening 2012 [47])
Esteban Torres High School (Unincorporated Los Angeles County, Opening 2010 [48])
Valley Region High School 4 (Los Angeles, Opening 2010 [49])
Valley Region High School 5 (San Fernando, Opening 2011 [50])
Maggie, I feel like you’re anticipating a lot of arguments that nobody is making and doing a difficult dance to avoid clearly articulating your complaint. In brief, nobody thinks that more affluent communities don’t deserve good public schools. Your liberal enemies think that all communities deserve good public schools and there’s a quarrel over the allocation of resources.
Again, I don’t really know about the exact number of schools and available slots in your district, but it seems like you’re complaining that the schools you’re kids are sent to have an unacceptable “demographic.” Now, either this means you don’t like the ethnic makeup of the school (to which this liberal certainly does say things like “tough titty”) or you’re blaming the demographic for the school’s pedagogical failings.
The problem, it seems, isn’t that you don’t have enough schools, but that these schools aren’t reserved for the type of students you’d like. And that the schools aren’t getting it done, academically. Obviously you wouldn’t describe it this way, but are we at least talking about the same thing here? I’m trying to understand you, Maggie, and you’ve written a lot of stuff that I find confusing. Am I on the right track?
Also, what the hell are you talking about that I’m “intentionally blind and biased” regarding sending kids to private schools? YOU are the one that said that parents are lining up to send their kids to private schools and that there aren’t enough spaces:
“They are desperate for private schools then  which is why these people usually try to get into the private school system in elem. school anyway. Do you know how few spots there are for kids entering the private school system in 6th grade”
I’m just noting that sounds like an odd market failure – tons of 6th graders with money who can’t find a private school. I’m not arguing that people should have to send their kids to private schools. Jeez.
Mavis, you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about, and are exactly the kind of person who doesn’t and won’t ever listen to reality. The fact is, again, again, there are no schools for the local population, and private schools are forced to take up the slack. By the way, this problem also exists in flats of Westwood and Brentwood, but I mentioned the hills only because those are all in the city of L A, whereas the flats below include West Hollywood and Beverly Hills. The one true statement you make is, “I don’t know the exact number of schools and slots in your district,’ but you nonetheless have to attack the facts that everyone who lives in these areas knows from research and experience. You exhibit the kinds of leftist attitudes that perpetuate the crisis, and which is why the middle class has left or is leaving most of the westside, and even the upper middle class often follows suit.
Maggie I would not lay all the blame of lack of schools on the feet of the leftists and liberals. There is plenty of blame to go around. The politicians who have been pro- growth have not thought about all the other public services required to support this growth, There are other public service needs which have not addressed, such as traffic, police, water, and energy. Most people don’t even remember or know we live in a dry desert and not a river delta. We don’t even have a large local water supply and yet we continue to build as though we have water wells in back yards, we don’t have many local power plants so we depend on an over burdened power grid to connect us to other power plants. We don’t have enough buried pipe-lines and capability to deliver gasoline and oil to local pumping stations and refineries. I don’t have to tell you about which area has the worst traffic in the country.
So just add schools or lack of schools to the list of issues not addressed by politicians who are not city planners, scientists, geologists, engineers and etc.
Mavis, you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about, and are exactly the kind of person who doesn’t and won’t ever listen to reality.
Gee, Mavis is making perfect sense to me. In my experience I tend to find Mavis succinct, open minded, generous when she disagrees, open to a different perspective, conscientious in making sure she understands the other point of view, and just-plain-knowledgeable, to boot. There could be folks commenting at WLA who fit your acerbic description, Maggie. But, I assure you, very few folks reading *this* thread would assign that description to Mavis.
Listener, you’re right in your last sentence: this thread does tend to preach to the converted — with the notable exception of Pokey and especially Woody, who happily drive them nuts. But Mavis clearly doesn’t have a clue what she’s talking about in this case, admittedly doesn’t live on the westside nor in this demographic, probably no kids. This is not a topic for general speculation, it’s a reality, and her denying it is akin to people claiming the astronauts made up the pictures of the moon because they didn’t experience it.
Anyway, I’m not interesting in trying to persuade Mavis of anything, her opinion is utterly irrelelvant.
Mr. Cynic: I agree on the other woes of the city, but the school issue IS a political, intentional blindness, as Mavis illustrates. Just look at the makeup of the LAUSD Boards: either very liberal, or childless, or like Galatzan, living in the Valley where schools are indeed for the neighborhood. Considering that people like her who live in relatively modest areas in the Valley feel it’s their right to have good schools, it’s ironic that leftists feel people who pay much more should be happy to send their kids to dangerous, poor-performing ones.
Thanks, listner. And just FYI, I’m a fella. I chose the Mavis handle on a whim and have lived with the gender-bending consequences every since.
Maggie says …….
Mr. Cynic: I agree on the other woes of the city, but the school issue IS a political, intentional blindness, as Mavis illustrates. Just look at the makeup of the LAUSD Boards:
*****************
Ok then let us look at the makeup of the school board who just recently voted a blow against the teachers union by allowing more charter schools, which might be considered an “anti-liberal” move.
I would agree a knowledgeable parent such as an active PTA parent or former teacher with kids would be more in-tune with the issues of schools and kids, than a childless board member. The reality is that the LAUSD is too large to properly mange and control. The other smaller cities should do like Torrance and create their own school district.
Now let’s step back and look at the “problem” of illegal immigrants in your schools. Who do you think is providing the employment incentive for the illegal immigrants? Is it the poor people in south central Los Angeles or is it the upper-middle and rich guy living on the Westside of town? As you know most of the food service industry relies heavily on illegal immigrant workers. When you mentioned that a mother on the Westside has to hire a nanny because she has to work to pay for private school. I will bet there are plenty of nannies on the Westside who are here illegally. Not every problem is the fault of the liberals, the rich bring in the illegal-aliens and then bitch about them being here. So there the paradox and circle of hypocrisy continues.
Ok then let us look at the makeup of the school board who just recently voted a blow against the teachers union by allowing more charter schools, which might be considered an “anti-liberal” move.
I would agree a knowledgeable parent such as an active PTA parent or former teacher with kids would be more in-tune with the issues of schools and kids, than a childless board member. The reality is that the LAUSD is too large to properly mange and control all of its schools. The other smaller cities should do like Torrance and create their own school district.
Now let’s step back and look at the “problem” of illegal immigrants in your schools. Who do you think is providing the employment incentive for the illegal immigrants? Is it the poor people in south central Los Angeles or is it the upper-middle and rich guy living on the Westside of town? As you know most of the food service industry relies heavily on illegal immigrant workers. When you mentioned that a mother on the Westside has to hire a nanny because she has to work to pay for private school. I will bet there are plenty of nannies on the Westside who are here illegally. Not every problem is the fault of the liberals, the rich bring in the illegal-aliens and then bitch about them being here. So there the paradox and circle of hypocrisy continues.
Cynic, I’m half asleep as I write this, just finished a project, but although this comment is totally separate from anything I was talking about, I’ll only address the issue of “the rich bring in the illegal-aliens and then bitch about them being here.” First, I think people in a neighborhood should be allowed to send their kids to school together, regardless of what color they are. My kid has two good black friends, for example, but yes, it is important to me that they have been raised in similar ways, one middle class, one son of a wealthy and famous person but down to earth. Not someone in a gang world, couldn’t handle it.
As for my neighbor who had to move because even with both she and husband being lawyers, couldn’t afford private schools if staying home with second child, and wasn’t insane enough to have worked so hard to send her kids to the school assigned our area — she had to keep two very legal nannies, in fact, and that was also part of the problem. They, like the nannies of most people I know, are paid above minimum wage, get other perks, become quite demanding. And because being a lawyer is a 12-hr a day job min. to be on partner track, whereas both only would work an 8-hr. day, maybe an extra hour on occasion, she had to pay two people which added up. Then she’d get home at night, wanting quiet time with her small kids, but had to sort out bickering between the two maids as to who did or didn’t do what, like clean the toilets. The senior one wouldn’t do it, the other felt slighted to always do it — that kind of crapola. I myself have had maids who also expected me to pay their insurance and car expenses, “because the last lady did it.”
Whatever point you’re trying to make, is irrelevant to this situation. Except that we’re paying to educate the maids’ kids somewhere, and with buses being slow as they are, they don’t want to work overtime or require us helping them out with a car.
You can address yourself to big agriculture or the garment industry, maybe. There’s an article in yesterday’s L A Times about how the crackdown on illegals is already having the effect of forcing some companies across the country to hire blacks and whites who haven’t worked in a while, but at higher wages.
Ha! Teach me to get sloppy/lazy/complacent and forget the editorial device s/he. Gender bending consequences, indeed. The sound you hear is my cognitive grid crashing as I re-order/re-organize the comments of yours that I can recall. What a hoot!
Gah! I seem to have a real problem closing the italics tag these days. Practice makes perfect. Damn.
I wonder how Maggie feels about the LAUSD, schools in her hood, and immigrants.
forts horizontal When into the yard, from from having a young I assumed or burnt, scissors