Monthly Archives: November 2008

Just call me “newcomer Norton”

The Chronicle has now published their “looking ahead to the new school board” story. (They agree with the Guardian — I won the fourth seat.) Here’s my quote:

There will be some tough decisions to make if the Legislature and the governor push through threatened cuts in state school funding, newcomer Norton said.

She anticipates discussions and perhaps even disagreements, but she doesn’t expect acrimony on the school board – something that has been a political constant in years past.

“Everybody feels like we all need to be in the same boat and rowing in the same direction,” Norton said. “Everybody knows divided we fail and together we really have a shot.”

Does anyone else think this is scary?

Tonight we saw a television commercial for the newest version of Monopoly – all electronic, without that annoying paper money. At the end of the ad, the smirking child actress says: “Fast and without cash–that’s how I play. How do YOU play Monopoly?”  Perhaps I’m a traditionalist, but the financial turmoil of the past year makes me think that perhaps “fast and without cash” is perhaps the wrong lesson.

School Community Summit

everett_tiles

Last Saturday I was at the gorgeous Everett Middle School to attend the School Community Summit where parents, teachers and principals had their first real taste of the new Balanced Scorecard and a chance to hear what going “Beyond the Talk” might mean for their school communities.

Continue reading

New calendar proposed for SFUSD

KC has blogged about proposed changes to the SFUSD calendar over at sfschools.org. The proposed changes have been a big topic on the various school chat groups as well.  In a nutshell, the Superintendent is proposing to move the first day of school up several weeks, so that schools would start the second week of August, rather than the fourth week. School would let out in late May, just ahead of Memorial Day.

While there are some arguments in favor — bringing SFUSD’s calendar in line with City College’s, and having the Fall semester end before winter break to give middle and high school students a true vacation — I’m dubious. For one thing, summer and after-school programs have already made their plans for the year. Strange as it sounds, making such a change by summer 2009 would wreak some serious havoc for the nonprofit organizations which run these programs. Second, the change would throw SFUSD’s schedule seriously out of whack with those offered by independent private schools, private preschools, and parochial schools. That would be a hardship to the many families whose children utilize both public and private schools.

So while I’m willing to look at changes to the master schedule that benefit kids and make our schools work better, I question the pace of the proposed schedule change and also whether the benefits are worth the drawbacks.  I think this idea needs a lot more discussion and exposure. And if we ultimately decide this is a great idea, then we should give community organizations and families more time to adjust to the change.

Belated thanks!

The other day I came across this picture on the United Educators of SF (UESF) web site. I know exactly when it was taken – the Saturday before Election Day, when the rain was coming down in torrents. UESF members campaigned tirelessly for their endorsed candidates, and I’m truly, truly grateful for the support I received from UESF members.

On election results: the count will be certified soon and it looks good. Stay tuned!

And the count goes on . . .

There’s not much to update, which is why I haven’t. I’m still in 4th place, 765 votes behind Jill Wynns and 5034 votes ahead of Barbara Lopez. The trend we’ve seen since Election Night is holding. The Examiner has a piece this morning quoting the Elections Dept. as saying it has 5,000 ballots left to count. There are also a lot of provisional ballots left to count, so while it is getting mathematically more difficult for someone to edge me out for a seat, it’s not impossible.

Results are updated each afternoon at around 4 p.m. You can find them here.

Well, if the Guardian says so . . .

. . . It must be true!  From the SFBG politics blog tonight:

With the vast majority of the absentees now counted, it’s safe to call the school board election. Norman Yee was easily re-elected; Sandy Fewer is in second. Third place appears to be incumbent Jill Wynns, with Rachel Norton just a bit behind her. Those will be the four people elected.

Today’s updated election results do indeed show Jill Wynns and I holding steady in third and fourth place, respectively. Elections says there are about 20,000 absentees left to count, and another 16,000 provisional ballots. So while it’s not inconceivable that Barbara Lopez or Jaynry Mak could still come from behind and win a seat, I am starting to breathe a bit easier.

Enrollment Fair

Update (Sunday): Jill Wynns and I are essentially tied for last two seats. Updated results here.

cropped_fair

Today was the annual SFUSD enrollment fair. It’s a great event – parents, staff and students from every public school come to promote their schools to families looking for a public school. There was amazing energy this year – particularly from the high schools. And though the enrollment process is very nerve-wracking for families, it seemed to me as though there was a bit less angst and a bit more eagerness as families browsed the many good public school choices we have in San Francisco.

Sloooow going

Update: Tim Norton is demanding that I keep the Election Results link up top. I am in third place now.  And Tim Redmond at the Bay Guardian agrees with the S.F. Examiner that this count is going way too slowly.

The Chronicle has a relatively clear explanation of where the count currently stands and why things could change:

As of Wednesday morning, San Francisco’s Department of Elections reported having 136,000 ballots left to count and by Wednesday afternoon workers had counted only about 12,000 of those. Those ballots include both provisional ballots and mail-in and early ballots.

John Arntz, the city’s elections director, said it is unlikely that all those outstanding ballots will be counted until late next week. The reason? The sheer size of the San Francisco ballot, which was three or four cards depending where you live. It takes time to run those through the tabulation machines, which can do a maximum of 80,000 cards a day.

The Examiner is not happy about the slow pace:

With a mind-boggling 36 percent of The City’s ballots not even tallied as of 24 hours after Election Day, the results continue dribbling in daily. Only 4,000 additional ballots were counted on the first day after election, because just one person was available to process ballots Wednesday. And a paltry 12,000 more ballots were counted as of late Thursday afternoon.

Certainly, the Elections Department needed to field all its resources on Election Day to cope with the heavy crowds. But only one person processing mail-in ballots the day after — how is that even conceivable in a major city?

Updated counts are posted every afternoon (I’m not clear on whether they will update the counts over the weekend, but it seems to me it’s the least they could do).  As of Thursday afternoon, Barbara Lopez and I are essentially tied for the last two seats, with Jill Wynns not far behind.

Also, I talked to Natalie the Kindergarten Crusader last night. Since I don’t think five-year-olds grasp “cautiously optimistic,” I kept things straightforward. “It looks good,” I told her. “I’m still ahead.” But like the hard-boiled campaign operative she is, Natalie didn’t sugar-coat it. “But I don’t know if you won,” she responded calmly. Neither do I – but Natalie and I can be proud that we worked hard and ran a good race.

Taking on insurers to ease school districts’ burdens

Taking a break from election results . . .

feda

Tonight ABC-7 has a very interesting story featuring my good friend Feda Almaliti, who successfully took on her insurance company to pay for treatment for her son with severe autism. Kaiser told Feda that her son’s issues were purely educational, and told her to go to her local school district to get them to provide the intensive behavioral treatment he needs.

After several frustrating years and lots of hard work, Feda won an independent medical review of her son’s case and was awarded comprehensive behavioral treatment at Kaiser’s expense. While her case does not set a legal precedent, I think it exposes a huge issue in special education and a real opportunity for school districts to join with parents to argue that health insurance companies should pay their fair share of the sometimes very high cost of treating autism spectrum disorders–which are both medical and educational in nature. It’s almost laughable (if it didn’t make me want to scream) to hear a Kaiser executive say in Part II of the piece that “schools have traditionally said they are responsible for these kinds of interventions.” Oh, really? That would be news to the California School Boards Association. (It’s also interesting to listen to the raw interview with Sharon Levine, the Associate Director of Kaiser Permanente.)