On the Agenda

[Karin Foust]

The following are the recommendations being presented tomorrow at 7:30 am.

 

District Recommendations:

• Make Claremont Middle School a school of choice (from 11/7)
• Expand capacity at Montclair to address overcrowding (from 11/7)
• Examine feasibility of increasing facility capacity at Hillcrest (new)
• Amend AR 5116.1 for redirection of Hillcrest students to Kaiser until facilities become available at Hillcrest (new)

[Hervey, Andy (US)]

I see that the last recommendation was to make redirection from Hillcrest to Kaiser “until facilities become available at Hillcrest.”  What about when (if) facilities become available at Montclair.  Wouldn’t Montclair then become the redirection “school of choice”? Was this discussed?

 

Andy

 

---

This email is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only.  If you have 
received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and then 
delete it.  If you are not the intended recipient, you must not keep, use, 
disclose, copy or distribute this email without the author's prior 
permission.  We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting 
software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on 
any attachment to this message.  We cannot accept liability for any loss 
or damage caused by software viruses.  The information contained in this 
communication may be confidential and may be subject to the attorney-client 
privilege. If you are the intended recipient and you do not wish to receive 
similar electronic messages from us in the future then please respond to the 
sender to this effect.

[Rhonda Woo]

Montclair is not available within our megaboundary.  Had the OUSD staff recommended a boundary change, which they didn't, then Montclair would have been a option for a portion of the current Hillcrest boundary.

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Hervey, Andy (US)
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 1:07 PM
To: hillcres...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: On the Agenda

[Karin Foust]

This was raised by Kerry (and I understand she is supportive of it) and I personally think this group should speak out loudly for it.  Who wouldn't rather be redirected to Montclair over Kaiser.  Its just plain closer and for those on that side of the enchachment - its our next neighborhood school.  I believe it is unlikely Hillcrest will build again anytime soon.  There is not enough money to go around and other schools need it desperately.  I believe Montclair could really happen - let's get a piece of it.  It supports the project, eliminates part of the problem and makes sense. 

 

I think you should all write in to the board members and even speak to it at the meeting!

 

It is true that it is not in the megaboundry - but for some reason staff really didn't present changing the boundry to Montclair.  I would urge you to reach out to the district for this change!  The Megaboundry was a stop gap to cover them, but it was set before the expansion project was on the table.

 

Karin

[Rhonda Woo]

Within the handout for the November 21, 2008 meeting, there were a number of suggested redrawn boundaries, wherein all sorts of funky shaped boundaries were suggested, one of which even enlarged the current western Hillcrest boundary. The bottomline from this "analysis" was that no new, natural boundary could be achieved and therefore a boundary change was not recommended.

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Karin Foust

Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 1:12 PM
To: hillcres...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Agenda

***********************************

----->>>>>THIS EMAIL MESSAGE, INCLUDING ANY ATTACHMENTS, IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. This message may be an Attorney-Client communication from Berry & Berry and as such is privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient of this message, or an agent responsible for delivering it to an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, if any hardcopies exist return it and delete the message in its entirety. Recipients are not to construe email messages from Berry & Berry as legal advice unless recipient is a represented client of Berry & Berry’s and sender is a practicing attorney of Berry & Berry.<<<<<-----***********************************

[Hervey, Andy (US)]

Thank you Karin.  And I agree that this should be a priority for all of us as it presents the possibility of a real solution.  From a pure real estate perspective, Montclair has the best expansion potential.  There is more than enough room on that campus.  Therefore, with the proper alignment and finding (both of which are hurdles) there is absolutely no reason that Montclair could not become an excellent K-8 on par with Hillcrest, with capacity to solve the Hillcrest overcrowding while also giving the redirected students the same level of education and growth support.

 

That said, how can we speak loudest on this.  I certainly think that our collective voice is louder than any individual’s.  Petition, survey, individual emails to OUSD board members, all of the above…?  We need community organization.  Do we have anyone in this group with formal experience in this regard?

 

Andy

 

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Karin Foust
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 1:12 PM
To: hillcres...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Agenda

 

This was raised by Kerry (and I understand she is supportive of it) and I personally think this group should speak out loudly for it.  Who wouldn't rather be redirected to Montclair over Kaiser.  Its just plain closer and for those on that side of the enchachment - its our next neighborhood school.  I believe it is unlikely Hillcrest will build again anytime soon.  There is not enough money to go around and other schools need it desperately.  I believe Montclair could really happen - let's get a piece of it.  It supports the project, eliminates part of the problem and makes sense. 

</pre

[Karin Foust]

Rhonda -

I saw that they presented the shift toward Kaiser and that that was messy, but on slide 17 they showed the shrink boundry if they phased out the middle school and it clearly showed a cut-off towards Montclair.  I don't actually believe that they will formally change the boundry, but we could easily plea that as part of the expansion process that students closer to Montclair be redirected there.  Nothing is finalized yet!  Don't you think.

 

Andy,

At this point, getting everyone to speak as one is VERY difficult.  There really doesn't seem to be much agreement on anything.  I would caution of opening the K-8 can of worms as that complicates everything further and they really want to draw this to conclusion ASAP so they can move on to anything else... anything!   Rhonda and the gang worked very hard last time to present a LONG list of names and supporters to stop other decisions and it went nowhere.

 

I think the board members will be listening at the meeting and reading the emails.  I would recommend writing to all of them to support redirecting Hillcrest to Montclair as part of the expansion.   I honestly believe most of the redirected will feel somewhat OK with that over the others.   Just keep the point simple and direct.

 

I know Chabot is speaking out for the money to go to Claremont.  They need repairs desperately as the school is in horrible shape.  Let them take on the whole middle school question and HIllcrest expansion - focus on the redirection policy for our kids in the near term. 

 

Karin

[Rhonda Woo]

Anything is possible. The question is what is likely.

 

At this time, I don't favor a boundary change if it means that Chabot will no longer be an option.  I am in favor of suggesting that even if there is no change to the current Hillcrest boundary that families residing along the eastern Hillcrest boundary be allowed to choose Montclair over Kaiser as a holding spot until space is available at Hillcrest, suggesting that the December 12, 2007 suggested boundary change be used as a guide to determine which families along the current eastern Hillcrest boundary can elect Montclair.  

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Karin Foust

Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 1:30 PM

[Karin Foust]

I favor it to be an change to the current redirection policy so that it is not a formal boundry change even.  Just amend the redirection policy for the details you stated below.  I think you have something here Rhonda!  This can really help alleviate some of the immediate concerns for parents on our side of Broadway. 

 

I believe they are trying to take Chabot out of the equation with that Kaiser recommendation though.  Chabot does not want to be the first on primary redirection spot for ALL of the HIllcrest redirects.  If we have 10 redirects - that's a lot.

 

I know everyone says in the end - it was only a couple of families that didn't get in, but its a long road to get there...

[Rhonda Woo]

I don't think that the OUSD is trying to take Chabot out of the equation. I think one or more persons thought that it would be a good idea to guarantee a spot at some school in District 1 that isn't at the bottom of the list as a concession.  The reality is that if the 6 families initially accepted at Hillcrest but who chose not to attend for whatever reasons did not occur, 12 re-directed families would be a Chabot in the 2008-2009 school year.  I think that Chabot's performance, considering the number of program improvement children that it has, really is quite extraordinary.

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Karin Foust

Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 1:50 PM

[Karin Foust]

But they are taking it out of the equation with the recommendation aren't they?  I interpret that to mean there really is no option - or am I thinking of it as too definitive.  Have you talked to Michael about your form?  If you put Chabot as number two, are you considered after the PI folks or as a redirect in the priority ranking?  If its after PI, I think that everyone will go to Kaiser and won't get picked through the options for Montclair or Thornhill or Chabot.  Last year Michael's office could work with the numbers to move us to the "next closest school" and it was more of a reasonableness thing.  This year he is going to be bound to these priorities.

 

Am I understanding this correctly?

[Rhonda Woo]

I have not asked Michael. I asked the staff at the November 21, 2008 meeting to correct me if I was wrong in my understanding and I was not corrected.  I stated that my understanding of the policy as it was explained to Wendy Chow, who asked a similar question, that under the proposed policy, the following would occur:  If I selected Hillcrest as my first choice, Chabot as my second choice, and no other choice on my option form, that under the proposal, this is what I could expect--If Hillcrest and Chabot were full, then the OUSD would send my child to Kaiser, even though I did not list Kaiser on my option form.  Bottomline: I will confirm my understanding at the next meeting.

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Karin Foust

Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 2:07 PM
To: hillcres...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: On the Agenda

[Sharon Murphy/Richard Nelson]

At the Special Committee meeting prior to the last one, it did seem as though Kerry favored a slight redrawing of boundaries toward Montclair with some added capacity at Montclair.  I was surprised at the last meeting to see absolutely no discussion of such an option.  From OUSD staff's presentation it looked as though they didn't consider it at all.  When you look at the superficial reasons given by OUSD for not recommending any kind of boundary change (and the fact that they didn't even look at Montclair despite Kerry suggesting they do so at the prior meeting), it seems clear to me that they do not want to make any boundary changes.  Also, Gary Yee (the Board of Education rep for Montclair) has stated several times -- including at the last Special Committee meeting -- that he is not in favor of changing boundaries.  Additionally, Interim Superintendent Mayor has also made it clear that she does not favor changing boundaries.  I would imagine that the firestorm of criticism OUSD staff took after the last recommended (but not passed) boundary change (which would have moved a large portion of Hillcrest's catchment into Montclair's) might have something to do with that, although I certainly don't have any insights into OUSD's thinking. 

 

I don't think that the reason Kaiser was selected as the "redirect" school for Hillcrest was because it was in Hillcrest's megaboundary.  As long as OUSD was proposing to amend the megaboundary regulation anyway, they could have chosen any school to place all Hillcrest redirects into.  Or they could have just left the megaboundary concept in place.  It is decent of them to want to guarantee space somewhere for all potential Hillcrest redirects to place them as a group. With Montclair looking like an expansion could take place relatively quickly if approved, however, it is odd that it doesn't look like Montclair was considered as such a space.

 

If people choose to try to change that portion of the recommendation though, we need to be careful how we phrase it.  It might go over better to ask for the reasons why such a plan wasn't considered in light of the fact that now it looks as though expanding actual capacity (not just replacing portables as they are doing with the current building project at Chabot) at Montclair is achievable.  Also, I wonder whether the Montclair community is onboard with this proposed expansion.  When I attended their PTA meeting at which Gary Yee spoke, as well as Roberta Mayor, several Montclair parents spoke against the idea of expanding the school's capacity.

--  Sharon

[Rhonda Woo]

Attendance at the December 10, 2008 meeting for pre-K families is imperative if you are a pre-k parent who would choose Chabot Elementary School as a second choice if Hillcrest were full.  My previous understanding regarding Recommendation No. 4 that was made by the staff on November 21, 2008, which was to use Kaiser as a place to hold Hillcrest overflow until Hillcrest has increased capacity, was wrong. 

 

Michael Bonino has just confirmed that under Recommendation No. 4, all Hillcrest overflow will go directly to Kaiser.  Specifically, if you put Hillcrest as No. 1, Chabot as No. 2, and list no schools thereafter, should Hillcrest be full, your child will go directly to Kaiser.  If the Board of Education declines to accept Recommendation No. 4, only then will Hillcrest families have priority behind siblings and neighborhood kids at Chabot.

[Wendy Chow]

In my opinion, leaving the existing mega-boundary policy in place likely would be better than adopting this new Recommendation No. 4.  At least under the existing mega-boundary policy, redirected Hillcrest kids would get priority at Chabot over non-neighborhood kids.  Under the interpretation presented below, if a redirected Hillcrest child did not want to go to Kaiser, and wanted Chabot instead, he/she would be put in the general lottery for intra-district transfers, with no priority status.

 

 

---

[Karin Foust]

I probably agree - though realistically I think the outcome is mostly the same.  A few more families in Chabot perhaps, but in the end they will redirect primarily to Kaiser.  There is some comfort in being together. A year ago when faced with the idea of being spread to many schools we were very afraid of that. There is some comfort in having a clear choice.  There is some comfort in knowing it won't be Emerson.

I think if there is a plea to be made it must be short and concise and not full of threats of moving or leaving OUSD.  I would say that to go out to say that Kaiser is not a good enough option will not be well received.  It is a great option for many families so we cannot stand there and say that it is not good enough.  It has to be factual.  What are we trying to achieve?

I think the best bet is to ask for more options through the OPTIONS program. To allow the staff more room to work with the needs of the redirected families and take advantage of space, should there be some, in other near-by schools.

Along with that, if there is an expansion at Montclair, it is questionable if it will be completed in the Fall.  But, if there is going to be one, they must allow some of the kids in this neighborhood access to it.  That really is a logical plea that I think the Board would respond to.  They can do it through the redirection policy, without changing borders.

Karin

[Sharon Murphy/Richard Nelson]

At the last Special Committee meeting, the head of OUSD Facilities noted that additional portables (the beginning of expanding capacity at Montclair) could be placed at Montclair by the beginning of school in 2009.  However, he noted that Board approval for such placement would have to occur very soon in order to make it happen by the fall.  As shown in its preliminary form at the Montclair PTA meeting, the proposed expansion project would occur in 3 parts with portables added for the next two years while work on a permanent building was completed.

 

Montclair is not one of the schools in Hillcrest's megaboundary.  As the policy currently stands, Hillcrest redirects would not receive priority status to attend Montclair.  It is my understanding that the only way Hillcrest redirects could attend Montclair would be (1) by a boundary change, (2) by going into the general Options lottery with no priority status, or (3) by having the Board amend the redirection policy/regulation to allow for Hillcrest redirects to go there despite the fact that it is not in Hillcrest's megaboundary. 

 

Sharon

[Karin Foust]

I'm recommending #3 be a component of the approval of the Montclair expansion.  When the redirection was proposed and approved there was no expansion of Montclair on the table. They are already amending the redirection to limit it to Kaiser instead of the megaboundry, so apparently these things are somewhat flexible.   : )

[Rhonda Woo]

I think that the clear and concise message regarding Recommendation 4 is that it is discriminatory and discrimination is always wrong.  If Recommendation 4 were approved, redirected Hillcrest families are the only families within District 1 who have a lesser chance of getting into Chabot than each and every other redirected family in District 1.  Why should redirected Hillcrest families receive 5^th  priority whereas each and every other redirected family in District 1 will receive 3^rd priority?

 

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Karin Foust

Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 10:00 PM
To: hillcres...@googlegroups.com

[Lawrence Busansky]

If this policy really means that Hillcrest redirects 'must' go to Kaiser, it makes no sense.  As Rhonda points out that means Hillcrest re-directs have fewer choices than anyone else in the district and are the only ones who can't make their own choices, once their neighborhood school has become unavailable to them. 

 

If proximity is part of the calculation, it's true that it's close if you're on the Montclair side or North side of the Hillcrest neighborhood. It's not close if you're on the other end. 

 

L

[Mike]

Keep in mind that hillcrest is the only school in OUSD that can't take all its neighborhood kids, so when you say it has fewer options, that was OUSD's way of ensuring HC parents had 'certainty' which is what everyone originally asked for. Also we had requested that the neighborhood kids be kept together. Now it seems you are asking for the old ways.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

---

From: "Lawrence Busansky"
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 23:49:31 -0800

[Rhonda Woo]

Chabot is a District 1 school. It remains unclear whether all neighborhood kids for Chabot will be accepted.  Should a Chabot family be redirected, the Chabot family's priority is 3rd in the family's second option.  Hillcrest redirects under the proposed policy is always 5th unless the Hillcrest family places Kaiser as the second choice.  I am not asking for the "old ways." 

 

I'm asking for what was voted for in June 2008 as applicable to all Oakland families choosing to attend a school in the OUSD:  1) siblings, whether neighborhood or not; 2) neighborhood children; 3) redirects; 4) program improvement; and 5) general lottery.

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 8:35 AM

[Garner K. Weng]

If this suggests that we would now be taking an inconsistent position in contesting the proposed mandatory Kaiser redirection, I don't see it that way at all. I don't believe that anyone has ever asked for certainty even at the expense of all other considerations. Certainty that includes an inappropriate inequity is, in my view, unacceptable.

 

In any event, the current recommendations, as I understand them, do not give much certainty. The proposed mandatory Kaiser redirection is coupled with the idea that those redirects would be able to go back to Hillcrest when capacity is increased, as well as vague proposals to explore increasing capacity at Hillcrest -- all of which has little shape or predictability. And if you are a parent who has a child entering kindergarten in 2009, the idea that OUSD would now be giving us the certainty that we want is a joke. If these decisions were made six or nine months ago, perhaps there would have been enough certainty on which we could now act. Instead, it's December, seemingly years into this discussion, final decisions on many of these issues haven't been made, and the recommendations and proposals keep changing. In fact, the proposed mandatory Kaiser redirection would undo a Board decision that was made some months ago -- which if anything increases uncertainty.

 

As a smaller point, my sense was that, under most folks' projections, Hillcrest is not going to remain the only school in OUSD that can't take all its neighborhood kids. I am not all that on top of that data though, so someone should correct or supplement me here if I'm wrong about that.

 

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 8:35 AM

[Rhonda Woo]

Lawrence Busansky, Wendy Chow and I have sent an e-mail to the directors of the Board of Education asking that they vote against a mandatory redirection of Hillcrest families to Kaiser.  The below is a copy of our e-mail in the event that you feel inclined to contact the directors with similar views.  Their e-mail addresses are as follows:

 

'David.K...@ousd.k12.ca.us'; 'Alice.S...@ousd.k12.ca.us'; 'Kerry....@ousd.k12.ca.us'; 'Gregor...@ousd.k12.ca.us'; 'Noel....@ousd.k12.ca.us'; 'Edgar.R...@ousd.k12.ca.us'; 'Gary...@ousd.k12.ca.us'; 'Christoph...@ousd.k12.ca.us'

 

 

Dear Directors of the Board of Education:

 

Please vote against the proposed mandatory redirection of Hillcrest students to Kaiser.  It would prevent Hillcrest families from having the same input into their redirection as other Oakland families and is unnecessary.

 

On November 21, 2008, the Special Committee voted in favor of the District's recommendations regarding how to alleviate overcrowding in the Oakland Hills:  1) Make Claremont Middle School a school of choice; 2) Expand capacity at Montclair to address overcrowding; 3) Explore feasibility of expanding capacity at Hillcrest; and 4) Amend AR 5116.1 for redirection of Hillcrest students to Kaiser until facilities become available at Hillcrest.  Although I attended the hearing, it was not made clear what Recommendation No. 4 meant.  It has now been explained by Michael Bonino. If Recommendation No. 4 were adiopted, Hillcrest families would have no opportunity to express any choice or preference on their redirection--and because of that would be singled out and treated differently than Oakland families in other neighborhoods. 

 

There is an existing process that handles redirection that has been long discussed and was only recently modified.The Board of Education voted in June 2008, after years of discussion and public forums, that the following be the enrollment priority policy for the OUSD:  1) siblings, whether neighborhood or non-neighborhood children; 2) neighborhood children; 3) redirected children; 4) program improvement; and 5) general lottery.  As the Oakland population grows, more and more schools will face overcrowding and the issue of redirection under this priority policy.  Under this policy, all Oakland families are at least allowed to express their preference for second-choice or later-choices to which they might be redirected (though of course are not guaranteed those choices).  Because they are not guaranteed those choices, the existing policy also does not put undue strain on any other schools, as they will at a certain point of capacity be able to turn away redirects.

 

Recommendation No. 4 would undo the ability to express any preference -- and undo the June 2008 decision -- for redirected Hillcrest families ONLY.  Although the OUSD staff members verbally stated at the Special Committee meeting held on November 21, 2008 that Recommendation No. 4 would be treated "as an overlay" to the existing megaboundary policy stated in the previous paragraph, it now appears that is not the case.  Under Recommendation No. 4, redirected Hillcrest families are effectively forced into Kaiser being their second choice, as they would have 5th priority for any school within the megaboundary except Kaiser. This, in effect, eliminates the megaboundary policy for Hillcrest redirects ONLY. Every other redirected family in the OUSD has 3rd priority at the schools listed on the family's Option form that are within their megaboundary and thereby have at least some chance at their chosen second-choice school.  Hillcrest redirects, however, would not have that same priority. Some Hillcrest families may like Kaiser as their second-choice; but some have already expressed geographic-distance and other concerns that would drive their desire to be able to list a different second-choice -- and at least have some chance of realizing that other second-choice. 

 

If you do adopt Recommendation No. 4, we ask that you ensure that it is indeed implemented as an overlay and not as a replacement to the megaboundary policy. That is, we understand that Recommendation No. 4 was developed in response to requests that redirected Hillcrest students have a "home school."  That concept can be achieved by having Kaiser as the school of choice for redirected Hillcrest students who do not get into those schools listed on their Option forms after the megaboundary policy has been applied.  For example, if a Hillcrest family lists Hillcrest as the family's first choice, Chabot as the second choice, and no other school thereafter, and if Hillcrest is full, the redirected Hillcrest family shall have 3rd priority, behind siblings and Chabot neighborhood children.  If Chabot is full, then the redirected Hillcrest family would be directed to Kaiser.  But for the last portion regarding redirection to Kaiser, the priority described is how the system currently works for all other families in the OUSD.  In order to change this policy only for redirected Hillcrest families would be discriminatory and would require additional regulatory changes, in addition to the ones set forth in Recommendation No. 4.

 

Regards,

 

Rhonda L. Woo, Pre-K Hillcrest parent

Wendy Chow , First Grade and Pre-K Hillcrest parent

Lawrence Busansky, Pre-K Hillcrest parent

[Sally Ann Friedman]

Thanks guys!!  I will email them a similar message.

Sally Ann Friedman

---

Subject: E-Mail to the Directors of the Board of Education
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 17:04:19 -0800
From: Rho...@BerryAndBerry.com
To: hillcres...@googlegroups.com

[Jkfoust]

Hey sally ann

Is redirection to kaiser such a big deal?  I honestly would feel better then being subject to any north Oakland school and divided all over. The only loss is Chabot.  Isn't it?

Why don't they go fir Montclair with the expansion?

Confused. 

KARIN

[Hervey, Andy (US)]

I strongly believe that we need to push for 2 items now.  

 

1) Include Montclair in our mega-boundary.

2) Allow redirected families to choose any of the schools in this mega-boundary, including Montclair and Chabot, as their second choice rather than being forced into Kaiser (similar to Rhonda’s email to the board, with the addition of the Montclair solution). 

 

Given the boards interest in exploring expansion at Montclair (the reality is that it has a very large campus with great expansion potential) coupled with the fact that it is the closest neighborhood school to many of us on one side of the Hillcrest boundary, I believe the board may consider this. 

 

I plan to send this message to the board members via email, and hope that others on this group will do the same.

 

Andy

 

---

From: hillcres...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hillcres...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jkfoust

Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 8:23 PM
To: hillcres...@googlegroups.com

This email is for the use of the intended recipient(s) only.  If you have 
received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and then 
delete it.  If you are not the intended recipient, you must not keep, use, 
disclose, copy or distribute this email without the author's prior 
permission.  We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting 
software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on 
any attachment to this message.  We cannot accept liability for any loss 
or damage caused by software viruses.  The information contained in this 
communication may be confidential and may be subject to the attorney-client 
privilege. If you are the intended recipient and you do not wish to receive 
similar electronic messages from us in the future then please respond to the 
sender to this effect.

[Sally Ann Friedman]

I am just not keeping up that well these days Karin.  Back to work part time and juggling the family....you know....

My own personal thoughts (as I am not speaking as a rep anymore) is that I just wouldn't send my children to Kaiser.  So I would prefer to have Montclair (or Thornhill of course) or maybe Chabot as an option.

They should be pushing damn hard for Montclair expansion!

Hope you are well.  So appreciative of your continued support on all this stuff!

Sally Ann

---

From: thef...@gmail.com
To: hillcres...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: E-Mail to the Directors of the Board of Education
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 20:22:48 -0800

[Karin Foust]

I support this concept of going after the Montclair expansion.  I'm not sure the best technical strategy, but its not a stretch to send this area to Montclair if its expanded.  Thinking city-wide - the mega-boundary solution was very simply drawn by Middle School boundary area.  To ask that Hillcrest be North Oakland and add Montclair could ring as being unfair to the city. How can we help them draw us to Montclair without changing boundaries (since they don't seem to want to go there either and I think most would still like the lottery for Hillcrest as #1 anyway) or changing the mega-boundary methodology to add yet another exception?

Is it possible to change our mega-boundary to the Montera boundary instead of the Claremont one altogether? Could the split the neighborhood to divide it between the two mega-boundaries?  

Just still thinking....