I cannot figure out why people would or should be allowed to vote for someone to represent their area of residence AND the school(s) their children attend. Voters should be concerned with seeing to it that the schools in their area of residence are getting equal representation at PUSD board meetings and their chunk of the PUSD pie. At present, NW Pas. and Altadena are NOT!

A parent living in NW Pas. with a child attending Sierra Madre does not need to concern themselves with making sure SM gets representation - that will take care of itself. They can still be active members of the PTA or school site council.

They DO need to focus on whether their area of residence gets a fair shake. (Hint: if they are desperately trying to transfer their kids somewhere else, they AREN'T!) .Virtually every special program, from Mandarin dual language immersion to the very expensive IB are located in the east or in schools bordering San Marino. All recent school closings have been in Altadena and NW Pas. despite a high rate of public school attendance.

Until the people of these truly under-served areas have a cohesive voice in what happens in their local schools, this imbalance of good programs and lack of access to a decent education will continue.

(And of course, let's not forget that a large number of voters in school board elections do not have children who attend PUSD schools at all!)

Hi DShelley. Based on the SARCs, Altadena elementary was ranked 2nd or 3rd over the past 3 years in funding for all the elementary schools. Jackson was in the top third, as was Loma Alta before it was closed.
As to neighboring san marino or being in the east, have you looked at the demographics of those schools? Blair and Willard have nothing to do with their neighboring cities. The mandarin program used to be at Burbank before it moved to Field. Some of the kids from San Rafael actually come from Eagle Rock, and only about 12% of San Rafael enrollment is from their neighborhood. I agree, its probably an attempt to keep more people in public schools, but the fact that its located there isnt keeping people away.
I also would question the notion that there is a high rate of public school support in the altadena. I think we've talked before about how more than half of all altadena neighborhood school PUSD elementary kids go to a school outside of altadena (as of the report presented during consolidation last year). Thats not even including charter schools and is not including private schools. I agree that under-served areas need a cohesive voice, but thats going to be pretty unlikely to happen with such a low level of commitment for local neighborhood public schools.

I think its interesting to ponder whether the reason people decide against their neighborhood schools is really because they are feeling short-changed by the district.. rather than some other reason...

Again, Navigio, sorry I didn't respond to this earlier, but.... Altadena, Jackson, and other low income schools frequently are shown as being highly funded because the high percentage of "free and reduced lunch" kids bring a lot of federal and state funds to the district. The numbers aren't reflective of any concern on PUSD's part.

Don't be so sure the funding finds its way to the schools, though. At one point, Jefferson Elementary was named a Reading First school which should have resulted in over $400.00 per student going to the school. None of this funding ever found its way to the students of that school, BUT Jefferson was required to dig into their own school site funds to hire the required extra personnel required to be in compliance with Reading First. In one case, a young inexperienced teacher from another school was hired to come in and "coach" award winning teachers with over 20 years experience.

I am aware that Blair and San Rafael don't reflect the community around them. Were you aware that Blair was built so that the students from Allendale would not have to attend Muir after the white students of La Canada left Muir? Didn't work, which is why all of those slots had to be filled with bussed in kids from other areas.
A few questions remain for me: Why didn't we build that big beautiful new Blair building in the area where the majority of Blair's students reside? Why did we close Altadena schools, but leave San Rafael open? For Eagle Rock kids? Really?

SARCS are like rainbows and unicorns. some schools don't suspend their kids, this polishes them up. sierra madre technically suspended my child every day for six months, but you won't see that on a report. he was also marked present, so they collected that precious money while my wife and i taught him at home. what you also won't see is that they use part of that $40,000 they raise through the annual fund to pay for a time-out room called the guidance room- check out their SARC to see the flowery description-and that this room is run by a classified staff member with no certificated person, nor by a counselor.

you want to manipulate the public? let an insider write a report about themselves and the great job that they do. want to talk to me about direct knowledge of CST testing protocol violations that i reported to then principal gayle bluemel AND the department of education that went unanswered?

the SARC means N-O-T-H-I-N-G

Hi Tony. I like rainbows.. less crazy about unicorns.. ;-)
SARCs are not 'written' by the district, they are just a compilation of the data they submit to the CDE. Obviously if one doesnt believe any of that data, then they wont be of much use to those people. I guess one should wonder why any schools would not have exemplary numbers in all categories if that were the case. I guess we'll never know why schools choose to punish themselves.

Sierra madre had expulsions, though if yours were separate ones every day, then they cannot have been reported (if it was a single one, it may be included). Of course the latest data is two years ago, not last year, so that may be one reason (though i dont know the year of your case--the years before these the numbers are quite high).
http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/Expulsion/ExpReports/DistrictExp.aspx?cYear=2009-10&cChoice=DstExp1&cCounty=19&cNumber=1964881&cName=Pasadena+Unified

I checked with the state's standardized testing and reporting program and its possible to request the irregularity reports submitted by the district. That seems the only way to find out whether your reports were followed up on. I dont expect the district would volunteer to publicize reports that did not result in some determination of wrongdoing, as happened in the Roosevelt case recently.

fwiw, i thought you did a great job on your recent board meeting presentation, and especially liked your tshirt..

hi navigio. thank you for the kind words. mary and i worked for a while on the presentation and tried to keep it focused.

as far as i recall the sarcs were written by members of the school based on the information from cde. they do have some freedom in the narrative...... unless something has changed. like many things- including districting, it is a lot of information to wrap one's head around- which may explain what seems to be community apathy. maybe it's simply too much to actually digest.....?

no, my son wasn't expelled. we actually kept him home after the school changed his program and refused to promise us he would be free from harassment and bullying. the point i was trying to make was that the decrease in suspensions was due to an increase in "on-site suspensions (i.e. the time out room) which were not being documented (probably still aren't) and which pose a fundamental question for all parents- are you aware of when your child is being removed from class for behavioral reasons? this is more than simply a philosophical issue of right or wrong. when a child is removed from class, he or she is essentially being denied access to an education. that means that children- sent by parents to school to get an education- are being removed from access to it without parent notification. i am not speaking in speculation- it has happened to my children at sierra madre. for my youngest, who had an iep, every time he was removed from class was a violation of equal access.

when we realized that he had been removed from class on a daily basis? that it wasn't documented anywhere? well...... then where the hell was he, if not in class? i don't think we were unreasonable in demanding an answer to that.

back to the reporting- if a school chooses to run things like that- removing kids and not documenting it, nor notifying parents- and no one says anything..... it will be a practice that continues.

program improvement can't occur when children are removed from access to instruction. the issues we have been bringing up, mary and i, may not be popular in sierra madre, but they certainly are valid concerns.

I don't know, PUS Dad. Why did you enroll your children in a magnet school (Norma Coombs) instead of your home school, Webster? Why did you then move your kid over to Sierra Madre when the Norma Coombs principal blew out on there and headed back to Georgia?

You are very clear on the fact that these schools do not have an equal curriculum or equal leaders. That god daughter of Alice Petrossian, Hoori Chalian, who was pawned off on Jefferson Elementary had been a failure as both a teacher and a principal in Glendale. Do you think that the PUSD would have dared to have dumped her off on a higher income school? Think Sierra Madre would put up with the restricted curriculum of a Reading First School?

You argue like Newt: instead of answering the question, you attack the questioner. FYI, One child goes to Marshall, the other to Webster. As I wrote in the past, we initially chose Norma Coombs because we could walk our kids there. Again for the umteenth time, what was the "ton of money" sunk into Willard simply to enable it to teach IB? Do the teachers get paid more? Are the books more expensive?

I think there are some costs to IB. Fees to the organization, as well as books and teacher 'training', if im not mistaken. I dont think teachers are paid any more. However, I have seen IB mentioned on PEF's 990, so maybe they pick up part of the tab? I doubt its possible to tell from PUSD's budget who pays for IB and how much it is.

Navigio, Your explanation of the expenses of the IB program are correct. They must pay the IB organization itself for licensing, teachers are required to go through special training, expensive IB curriculum items must be purchased. The students are REQUIRED to have special enrichment programs including music, art, computer, P.E., and foreign language. The teachers are not paid more, but there are more teachers. i.e.,the regular classroom teachers do not teach Spanish - there are separate additional teachers teaching special classes. I am not sure how much Willard is currently in compliance with all of this.

PUS Dad is not confused about this - he knows this is a very expensive program - he just likes to feign bewilderment. I explained all of this to him last year. I am sure that the PUSD is not currently being up front with what this program costs, but Mary Dee Romney had all of the numbers when this program first came into being at Willard. She probably still does. I was sitting in the board meeting when she presented the expenses of this program and asked for justification of it in light of what a small population was being served. It was NOT established with PEF money, rather money from the general district funds - some other schools went without to fund it....

It WAS established in the hopes of drawing in the kids of the rich white folks of Chapman Woods. It didn't do so. There is no IB program available in the schools of Altadena or NW Pasadena.

Shelley: thanks for accounting for the ton of money.

Steve: the people I know that live in the "underserved areas" have universally stated that they simply look at the demographics of the schools and the test scores and quickly look elsewhere. Most of them also tell me they have heard from the moment they have children that the pusd schools are bad and they need to consider private school or leave town. They also admit that they hear this from people who have never had kids in the pusd. Its a self fulfilling prophecy, and those in the "underserved areas" have only themselves to blame.

11000. i have seen what a handful of sierra madre vigilantes could do to one little boy with autism, and how they scared PUSD into kow-towing to them instead of the law. when altadena is ready to smash their neighbors under their heals the way sierra madre parents do- only then will they be a political force to be reckoned with.

Hi Navagio, I meant to get back to a few comments earlier, but have this thing called a job (damn!). Anyway. the goal of "districting" (NOT REdistricting - we don't currently have districts) is NOT to get representation closer to district "user" demographics. These voting districts are NOT being established for parents, for students, for teachers, for administrators, or for the PEF. They are to make sure that the citizens a.k.a VOTERS (users or not) of Pasadena, Altadena, and Sierra Madre will have a say in how their community (in this case the PUSD), runs its school system. That is supposedly why we have a general vote for school board members, isn't it? It's how we select councilmen, senators, etc.
The way the system is currently set up, certain areas get NO true representation. Can you imagine if we ran our Federal and State government like that? Hey, the top vote getter Congressional candidates for the U.S. would represent everyone. Wyoming, Vermont, Rhode Island, could all be represented by a top vote getter from California (cause that's where most of the voters live, right?). That would be fair, right? Or, in the state government, InyoKern could be represented by a top vote getter from downtown Los Angeles! Fair? Nope, and either is having Altadena or NW Pas. supposedly "represented" by a white boy who lives on the other side of town. The rep, should live in the district he or she represents and he or she should have been elected by the folks living in that same area.

steve, regardless of the reasons people decide against PUSD, would you at least agree that involved parents choosing against it is part of the very reason it suffers, to the extent it does? And if one believes that standardized testing is virtually nothing more than a measure of home circumstance (PEL, SES, ELL, etc levels), might you even agree that our 'measure' of PUSD's success is more a function of who decides to stay and who decides to go, and less one of policy? In fact, in those terms, PUSD generally does better than most. Even, if using things like similar schools ranking (intended to account for those differences), out-performing some of our neighboring 'good' districts' schools...

Steve: i am sorry for your experience, but from seeing you on tv, it appears your experience may not be close enough in time to hold much relevance.

Hey, Steve, totally off- topic (this thread seems to have lost its topic, anyway), but I really liked your letter that just came out in the Weekly today. :-)

oh pusdad. i try to come to your aid, and you turn on me like a sierra madre pitbull.

i believe what i said was that if special education students had to be bused out of sierra madre, if my child was to be FORCED out of his school- then that should be required for everyone else. i call that educational equity.

let me also restate this other super popular idea: if the single factor in sierra madre's 900 api is in the delivery of instruction, then here is my straight up, in your face- solution. take the entire staff of sierra madre elementary school, move them to the "lowest" performing school, and let them work their miracles. let them show the rest of pasadena how it is done.

Even better idea to Tony's 5:14p comment. If delivery of instruction is the single factor in their high API then PUSD officials need to observe the instruction and have it replicated at under performing schools vs. moving them to the lowest performing school.
Why limit the success to 1 low performing school vs. creating success at many schools? However, I doubt you believe instruction is the only factor.

I don't think its the quality of instruction that determines API so much. The times just published a story about a study that found the single biggest factor in API was the income of the parents of the kids.

Yes, this is one of the points I was making, or asking early on. Appeasing outside agitators is an unfortunate aspect of real-life, however, I dont think that should be intended to counter the actual point of the law. One of those things is to avoid the potential for a situation where the majority decides the entire board makeup. Whether the resulting board makeup is any different than now is arguably less the point than whether that makeup is a result of separate geographic regions happening to make the same decision (if that happens, its still a function of a different process than exists today). I also dont think we should assume the intent is to get a specific ethnicity into a particular seat (even though people often put it that way). I personally dont believe one needs to be the same ethnicity in order to effectively represent a constituency (in fact, it had better not be the case given how diverse some of these districts will be). If there's anywhere that's true, its got to be southern california. That said, I am admittedly a naive optimist and readily admit to a valid counter that shared circumstance can mean something quite different than shared ethnicity. In any case, one group deciding to 'pool' resources to achieve a particular makeup can always be 'overridden' by the majority in the current system. That wont be possible after redistricting (unless all districts have an identical makeup, which is almost going to happen anyway).

"I actually kind of liked steve's suggestion, but thats not one of the options..."

It is, though. Just need someone to do the work to make it one of the actual maps. Takes a lot more work than just "it would be obvious to...", of course, which is one of the problems in general.

Remember, nothing about the maps up now is at all "final".

Pusddad, these were exactly the issues that the task force spent all of last summer discussing. Particularly, the aspects of PUSD's vulnerability to potential 2003CVRA-based lawsuits, given the history and makeup of the district and the city that makes up the majority of it, and the potential costs and consequences of a lawsuit.
If it's worth anything, IMHO, the potential benefits of this change pretty far outweigh the potential downsides.

pusddad......a nuisance? Perhaps.
It's starting to really look like our pestering has gotten some significant people to fly right out of PUSD, starting with Diaz, to Bluemel, to Blanco. Not sure why everyone left Honowitz holding the bag.......
Is it true that even if a district administrator was involved in violations, if they retire prior to the investigation they are immune?
PUSD is suffering because there's a revolving door of administrators who leave when the going gets "sticky" rather than owning up, taking responsibility and working towards a positive change.
Question: Do the demographics in Sierra Madre reflect the number of people with disabilities? Do the numbers of students identified Spec. Ed. reflect that of the rest of the district? I can tell you that my family was underserved in Sierra Madre by the responsible Board member, an area that wouldn't be considered such an area.

not to extend the tangent, but i've always been interested in various ways of calculating rates. Mary, what are you basing your numbers on? Here is what CDE dataquest seems to have to say about sped rates. There is clearly more than one way of measuring this though..
Sp.Ed. rates School
1% Rose City High (Continuation)
1% Cis Academy
4% Washington Middle
4% Pasadena Rosebud Academy
4% Mckinley
4% Aveson School Of Leaders
4% Washington Accelerated Elementary
5% Don Benito Fundamental
5% Longfellow (Henry W.) Elementary
5% Norma Coombs Alternative
5% Pasadena High
6% Blair High
6% Jefferson Elementary
6% Woodrow Wilson Middle
6% Learning Works!
6% Marshall Fundamental
6% Jackson Elementary
6% Aveson Global Leadership Academy
7% Field (Eugene) Elementary
7% Cleveland Elementary
7% Charles W. Eliot Middle
7% Hamilton Elementary
7% Sierra Madre Elementary
8% Madison Elementary
9% Franklin Elementary
9% John Muir High
10% Willard Elementary
10% Burbank Elementary
11% Daniel Webster
12% Altadena Elementary
12% San Rafael Elementary
19% Roosevelt Elementary
22% Loma Alta Elementary
64% District Non-Public Non-Sectarian Schools

why does my name come up with the word lawsuit? i have never threatened to sue the district, nor have i sued the district. yet.

i believe that last legal maneuver- a due process- was served on my family. it was a straw man to take the focus off of the documents that ed honowitz was hiding- and to give people (bluemel, diaz, blanco) a chance to cut bait and run like hell from us.

hi navigio. well, burbank is gone...... so that 10% (!) has been sent out into other schools, including sierra madre, and that was because there needed to be a class for my son- and so they imported one. my prediction for next year is that those children- those wonderful children- will be moved somewhere else to make room for sierra madre's special ed kids that they don't know what to do with - or- if we pull our child out and move him to another school- smes will toss that class out for another school. after all, no one is going to fight for kids with disabilities except the nutcase brandenburgs anyway, right? they want us to leave for a reason.

now, look at those numbers. 64% non public. pusd is struggling to keep it's population up, and they tried to send mine no-public. he's been in a public school all year. why? well, it's cheaper to send these kids to a NPS. is that a good enough reason to deny them the least restrictive environment? i don't believe it is.

sierra madre's 7% is over two schools. look at roosevelt. 19%. loma alta, 22%. these schools are 1/5 kids with some form of low or high incidence disabilities. those numbers are not natural proportions- not when you consider that MANY Pasadena families opt for private school- that just makes these numbers even MORE lopsided.

To Navigio's list - interesting that some of the highest % of SPED students were in Altadena schools (Altadena Elem, Burbank, Loma Alta). Is that list for this school year or last? Since Loma Alta & Burbank were closed down as "traditional" schools, where did these SPED students go?

good question, mr. altadena. where did they go? since this should be a targeted subgroup for program improvement (hark? where did elizabeth blanco sashay off to?) it certainly should be of interest.

Mr. Altadena: having a relatively high number of spec ed students should not be deemed a negative. Webster is at 11% and I haven't heard of any of my fellow parents complainig about it.

you underestimate us. don't you know who we think we are?

I have a pretty good idea.

pusdpap. been down this road, but one more time for my favorite cheerleader.

people are afraid. this is typical of people who observe bullying; they don't want to be the next victim. you really have no idea, but people come to us all the time. they ask for advice. they tell us they are afraid to speak up. they ask us to keep things "between us." we do that. they need help, but they don't want to lose their jobs or their standing, so they hide. they don't want it to happen to them next.

you yourself are afraid of publicly speaking your mind. that's why you hide behind a pseudonym. you told me you thought i would show up outside of your workspace with a picket sign. so, there you have it.

people don't say anything because, like you, they are afraid of being identified.

they could do it anonymously on this board. Why don't you encourage them to do so? All your supporters here seem to be out of towners.

why? i don't need corroborators. HONOWITZ hosted and organized a public bashing of MY child- not your child, not any students at webster. MY child. i don't need a corroborator. i have evidence. please.

HONOWITZ hid the petition after it was formally requested by my family, and it was withheld by the district prior to a mediation meeting, two IEPs, and withheld from a federal civil rights agency.

people like you only solidify my resolve. i am glad you challenge me. it reminds me of who i have to prove this to- the skeptic. thank you.

did you know that a recall of a pasadena board member requires 11,000 signatures?

Mary: The absence of others in the know about your situation that support your version of the events seems to give it less validity. Also re: the petition. Its seems to me that's how the ball gets rolling with government. Initially someone makes a complaint that is investigated for probable cause to proceed further. Once probable cause is found, thee hearing process gets started with adequate notice and full opportunity to be heard. Your gripe seems to be that the district respected the desires of the initial complianants to remain anonymous. Sometimes people won't come forward initially for fear of retaliation.

@pusddad: I don't know all the details of the Brandenberg's story, but here is a paragraph from a Pasadena Weekly article quoting German Barrero which seems to add validity to the Brandenberg's claim:

PUSD parent and past CAC Chair German Barrero agrees. Barrero and his wife, Rosie, attended the June 6 vigil as parents of a child with special needs who attended Sierra Madre Elementary from 2004 to 2007. During that time, Barrero said in an email interview, the couple saw the same exclusionary attitudes and segregation the Brandenburgs described.

http://www.pasadenaweekly.com/cms/story/detail/leave_no_child_behind/10244/

TF thanks. that makes 2, even if the second comes from 4-8 years ago, however currently relevant that may be.

it is a culture of exclusion that runs deep, of that i am certain.

it was no secret to HONOWITZ, nor BLUEMEL, nor BLANCO...... blanco even admitted it to me a number of times, so did bluemel. and as for honowitz refused to offer us equal access. the vigilantes, by sheer numbers, were given that. does might make right?

a teacher shared (their) own experience with me, before i was a leper, of having (their) child being removed for behavior that was asd, and that the child eventually was home schooled. my point? a teacher who won't fight for (their) own child isn't going to bat for my child.

like i said, it runs deep.

pusddad: re: “The absence of others in the know about your situation that support your version of the events seems to give it less validity”. Understood.
Diaz, Blanco, Bluemel are gone- 2 retired, 1 promoted to SFU. All never being properly deposed.
Honowitz remains. He is in the know, including having direct knowledge of the group forum he arranged (and denied us access to) and which was held at PUSD District offices. He acted as an administrator, perhaps implementing a policy that the group decided at this meeting?
Our gripe is significantly more than the district respecting anonymity (surely not our son's).
There was a federal investigation going on last year re: what happened to our son. PUSD staff made false statements, denied their actions, and hid significant docs and information so the district was found “in compliance” by OCR due to “lack of evidence”. Docs were with held even after a PRA request to both Diaz and Honowitz.
A 7 year old child was used as the scapegoat, and ended up marginalized and criminalized- in order to keep a lid on this.

My across-the-street neighbor's child was one of the Loma Alta special needs students who needed to find a place to land after the school closed ( He was transferred there after having been thrown out of Norma Coombs)! He is very high functioning with a mother so aggressive in getting help for her son that the principal of N.C. once had a restraining order in place against her. Her son is attending S.M. this year - short bus comes and gets him every morning! We live in Webster's boundaries although during the 25 years that I have lived in this house, with the exception of one child who attended Webster for a few months, every single child in my neighborhood who has attended public school (not many) has attended Sierra Madre or Don Benito.