Transparency? Information Vacuum Leads to Misunderstandings

As one who raised the pipeline as an issue and has subsequently come across other questions concerning SJHHS, I attended the Board meeting on August 11, to hear what the Board would decide to do with information in their possession, including information that I provided.

It was indeed unfortunate that Dr. Fitzgerald was personally inconvenienced to appear at the meeting. Her presence was entirely unexpected. Board members were told by senior District staff before the meeting that she would not be present.

Once Mr. Carter took the resolution to approve the pipeline analysis "off the table", introduced Dr. Fitzgerald, and suggested discussion only, "to give the Trustees time to consider new information", it was clear that Dr. Fitzgerald's presence was entirely unnecessary and unfortunate waste of her time.

It is not surprising that the Trustees had almost no questions for her. Three Trustees, Christenson, Maddox and Palazzo, had already submitted written questions to Dr. Fitzgerald that were answered in her July 31 memo (on the CUSD website). What all the Trustees knew was that another qualified expert had submitted statements to Trustees that directly contradicted Ms. Fitzgerald's answers.

This contradictory "new" information was compelling enough to get the attention of everyone involved, motivating Mr. Carter to withdraw the resolution of approval. His statement that "the Trustees" need more time was a bit off the mark. It seems more likely that he was motivated by the desire not to see the resolution and study rejected for a second time. This was a prudent move.

Everyone needs more time to consider this whole subject, and we need all available information to do so.

Too bad, but most of the audience was completely clueless about what transpired. The atmosphere was so tense that neither the Superintendent or the Trustees bothered to explain what they were doing.

CUSD took public comment on their website concerning the pipeline study during the past month. None of this material has been published. Senior district staff and Trustees received advance information from me, and from an independent expert, that raised questions regarding the direction of CUSD's pipeline study. None of this information has published. Is this the transparent process that was promised to parents when this discussion started?

Does the school district not have a duty to inform people of the questions related to the SJHHS site?

Many of SJHHS parents who were in the audience at the Board meeting probably thought that the Board’s failure to approve the pipeline analysis would result in pressure to close the school. Why?. These issues were raised long before school adjourned in June (the issues have existed since 2003), yet the 2007-8 school term was allowed to end normally.

When CUSD considers all the SJHHS site issues, a great opportunity exists to forge a corrective plan that everyone would regard as safe, protect the public's $155 million investment, and create a great school site. However, the continuing negative reaction of uninformed SJHHS “supporters” who view this question through a political prism is delaying the day that the issues will addressed and resolved.

In other words, who wants to support San Juan Hills High School?

Shall we continue to wait for CUSD to address pipelines, power lines, property lines, and site size? Shall we continue to standby as they engage in inept negotiations with the owner of the surrounding property?

These issues have existed since 2003, and they remain unresolved yet today. We should all be telling the CUSD Board that five years is long enough to get it right.