Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Uploaded: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 11:05 PM                                             

Schools hit 20-year high, but numbers puzzling
Enrollment increases vary by grade, but fall short overall of medium-range demographic projections

by Arden Pennell
Palo Alto Online Staff

Posted by Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 9:33 am

The real problem with overflow which these figures do not address, is the number of elementary families with kids in different elementary schools. This is happening a lot and nobody seems to pay much attention to them. The fact that two siblings are in different elementary schools puts horrendous problems on families, not just on a day to day basis of getting the kids to school, but on friendships/playdates/back to school night conflicts/homework/parent socials/networking/fundraising. This about it.

Is there anyway of finding out just how many families are in this position?

Posted by Another parent, a resident of Los Altos, on Sep 24, 2008 at 10:46 am

give me a break, it's not that much of a burden. it is no different than having one in middle school and one at elementary. write back when one of your children cannot go to school in this district because it does not provide an adequate program. then you will see what a burden is really like.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 10:55 am

Most families with students at more then one school are new to the district. It would be really helpful if Realtors were upfront on the reality of PAUSD - that just because you buy a house in the ... district does not mean your child(ren) will get in. The school secretaries have info on how full the school is. Siblings get priority when space opens up.

It is more of a burden to have kids at two different elementary schools then an elementary and middle. Older kids can often get themselves to school and the elementary and middle school one families attends is usually in the same part of town, as opposed to driving to Duveneck and Barron Park.

Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 11:14 am

I also think the split-elementary school is particularly hard because of the age of the kids involved and the likely commute across town in rush-hour traffic.

The increase is not a surprise, what I'd like to know is why the board didn't start dealing with it earlier. As it is we have another two years before Garland reverts to the district.

Posted by Oenoman, a resident of Menlo Park, on Sep 24, 2008 at 11:16 am

Doesn't this make you wish we had vouchers allowing parental choice?

Posted by yet another parent, a member of the Escondido School community, on Sep 24, 2008 at 11:32 am

What surprises me is that the school district continues to ignore written district policy and allow choice programs to bump neighborhood students. Escondido neighborhood kids are again being overflowed to other schools to make room for the Spanish Immersion expansion. You’d think they’d have realized the expansion was a problem last year and addressed the issue somehow so it wouldn’t be repeated this year.

Unfortunately, there’s not much acknowledgement of the problem within Escondido. Without a squeaky wheel there’s no incentive to adhere to policy. Bumped families include Stanford's Escondido Village residents who are new to the district and whose squeaks (if any) are less likely to be heard – by the district office or the Escondido community.

Posted by another parent, a resident of Los Altos, on Sep 24, 2008 at 11:56 am

Actually we found the absolute biggest burden timewise and organizationally was when one was in preschool and one in elementary. It was bigger than two elementaries, bigger than two districts and bigger than elemtary and secondary, all of which we have experienced. But I still say that two top-flight Palo Alto elementary schools are not much of a burden compared to what some other families, who also pay taxes here, are going through. Even when one school is a few points below the other in STAR testing.

Posted by paly student, a member of the Palo Alto High School community, on Sep 24, 2008 at 11:57 am

the article mentions that the middle and high schools have "fell short of even the medium-range projections". However, there are so many freshmen this year at Paly, that all the AP and upperclassmen classes have been cut, and the remaining classes have close to 40 students! BC Calculus is a hard class by itself, but with 38 people in the class, it makes it almost impossible to learn in class and ask questions. These problems should be addressed.

Posted by Paly Parent, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 12:31 pm

I hope someone at the district is actively seeking to find and remove students who are attending PAUSD schools illegally. When a school district like Fremont finds and removes 200 illegal students, I can only imagine there must be at least that many in PAUSD. Is there a way to get data on and follow this factor?

The situation at Escondido is something the district should be ashamed of but because we can't speak about the elephant in the room, Immersion programs, this will no doubt continue.

Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 12:46 pm

I think the district relies on reports of illegal residency and then investigates.

I think it's a real problem and it wouldn't be a bad idea for the district to do random residency checks. One thing that's not caught are families that live in the district and then move, but keep their kids in the schools here.

The Escondido situation exists because expanding the SI program helps ease overcrowding in the north cluster--and the north cluster, frankly, packs more political heft than does the west cluster.

But it's riduculous that a school that has way too many kids in it can't provide services to the kids in its catchment area.

I'm still not sure why the Tinsley number is static--it seems that it should be possible to get a space-available thing into the settlement. I mean, what other sort of other intradistrict transfer program takes no account of whether space is available?

Another parent,

Look it's worse to have terminal cancer than a broken leg. Doesn't mean the broken leg isn't a hardship. Or that the preferred situation is to have neither a broken leg nor cancer.

Posted by check the numbers, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 1:05 pm

" I think the district relies on reports of illegal residency and then investigates."

My understanding is that the district has one "investigator" to follow up on the confidential hotline for reporting violations. We could and should do better than this! We should not have to rely on students reporting their classmates. All this would take would be one day before school starts (especially in high school and middle school) where parents have to show up and have three forms for proof of residency before their student receives their schedule. Sure this may be inconvenient but at $10,000 savings per student this should be worth the effort. There are stricter proof of residency rules to play baseball in Palo Alto than to attend the middle schools and high schools. For Little League you have to show proof every year that you play All-Stars regardless if you have been in the system.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 1:48 pm

I agree we should have more residency checks, particularly for apartment complexes, not too many people are going to buy a house and not live in it, but renting a one bedroom apt in PA and using that as your address is cheaper then private school if you have more then one kid.

Lots of kids actually live with one parent outside of PA and use the resident parents address. Little League does not require proof of residence every year, only if you move.

Anyone know the "confidential hotline" number?

Posted by Overflowed, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 3:11 pm

Things have gotten so bad that the school secretaries are scared to give parents any expectation of when they can be placed in their neighborhood school.

We moved to Palo Alto this year, and our child has been overflowed to a school across town. The new policy is to not tell parents where they are on the waiting list. So no accountability, no checking to make sure that everyone plays by the same rules. There are parents who were overflowed all last year who are still waiting to get in. There's little chance we'll get in this year, and I'm doubtful we'll get in next year either.

Don't know what can be done -- we don't seem to have any control over the process, but it certainly is stressful.

Posted by CAM, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 3:22 pm

I was told there would not be room for my 1st grader at Addison until 4th grade.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2008 at 4:43 pm

Overflowed and CAM - no one really has control over the process. Each school has a limit to the number of kids it can take, the secretaries don't know who is going to move out of the area, so it is hard to predict. In 4th and 5th grade, the classes can get larger by a couple kids.

One of the big issues is the under predicting of families. Somehow whoever did the estimates of whether singles or families would move into new housing (like SOFA) totally underestimated the number of kids.

Posted by Sarah Janess, a resident of Los Altos, on Sep 24, 2008 at 6:38 pm

Has anyone EVER considered that we don't need ANY MORE HOUSING!

Posted by Grandma, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 2:25 am

Realtors always play up the schools. I visited a house in my neighborhood last week and the realtor was touting Fairmeadow and Gunn. So I told him both were full and Gunn students would go to Paly, he didn't change his story.

Posted by Here's the phone number, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 8:08 am

From PAUSD website:

Leave a confidential message for Palo Alto Unified School District's Residency Officer regarding a possible residency violation at (650) 329-3700 ext. 7385

Posted by Midtown, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 8:57 am

Get set to return Cubberley to the District and reopen it

as a third high school.

Posted by Sue, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 11:44 am

Once again....there are approximately SIX HUNDRED transfer students from EPA in the PAUSD under a court-ordered transfer program (1970's). Palo Alto was not a part of that law suit - but was on the receiving end of it. It was pushed by an EPA leader as the plaintiff, and, I think, a lawyer-member of the Sequoia Union High School Board. A recent Supreme Court decision may have negated that judge's order. Time to look into that. Does the PAUSD have the guts to do it? If not, do parents whose children are being bussed all over town?

Posted by Super D, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 12:33 pm

Regarding EPA kids who attend PAUSD, it is my understanding that it is limited to a certain number and if those EPA kids drop out or leave PAUSD, then they cannot return. Is this true?

Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 1:06 pm

Super D,

Yes, that 600 is the maximum and the transfers have to occur in the first two grades. So you can't apply for a transfer in middle school.

So the total number of transfers is lower than 600--for some reason I think the numbers in the 400s, but somebody else probably has the goods.

As I recall, they allow up to 70 VTA kinders into the district a year. So, yeah, the numbers are enough that it does affect the district when it's this overcrowded.

Again, my memory's fuzzy, so I may have the numbers wrong, but I remember it being about five kids per elementary school in kindergarten.

Posted by Senor Blogger, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 1:08 pm

Folks:

This is your School Administration at Work.

When do you think we will see some real Accountability and Leadership?

Posted by Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 1:28 pm

Hola Senor.

By the way, if the number is fixed since the 70's then the VTA program is not creating any growth issues - they are in our run rates, and we have well been able to absorb the cost and space for over 38 years. Not an issue, not a burden.

The issue - the thing that has changed - is the massive and rapid influx of dense housing development. The City Council is not considering the big picture of the impacts of tons and tons of new dense housing developments on all aspects of quality of life in Palo Alto for all residents, including over crowded schools, packed commutes (as our schools overflow all over town), at/over capacity fields, lack of convenient shopping, lack of all kinds of adequate city services and infrastructure to meet the needs of the PEOPLE that DENSE HOUSING brings.

In fact, it seems they are only considering the needs and profits of the developers who can make a buck on Palo Alto real estate values by quick turning those properties (although with the market as it is - they may be hurting on that assumption, with glut of proprerty here - that hurts us all. Another reason to put moratorium on new housing development - until the market can absorb the already built units.)

The city council needs to step up to the plate and show they are concretely addressing these issues before they approve any more dense housing projects. In other words - show how many children PAUSD influx have been created, and show where the schools are going to be built for those new enrollments, and show where the $ are coming from for those new schools. Show where they are building new fields, and where the dollars are coming from. Show where they are building the shopping, and the public transportion to that shopping for the new influx of residents. Etc. Yes, we need Accountability and Leadership - and it starts with the City Council in partnership with PAUSD. There should be no movement from one without a full and complete impact analysis on the other.

Posted by Overflowed, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 2:36 pm

Dear palo alto mom,

Sure school secretaries have no control over the process. I don't blame them at all, because they're just doing their job. But for the District to remove transparency is ridiculous. The waiting lists need to be made public in some form or another so we know how exactly bad the problem is. The poor Addison parent who has to wait *3* years to before (s)he can walk her/his kid to school deserves better than that.

Maybe if there was more transparency we could try to come to solutions to the problem.

Posted by yap, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 3:43 pm

Overflowed, I don't know that they could make the waiting lists public. I would expect people to be bumped from their place by sibling preference and other legal requirements.

If you were told you were next in line but then another child managed to get in before you, you'd expect an explanation. If the explanation required divulging personal details then you've got right to privacy working against your wish for transparency.

The best you could hope for is some sort of independent audit/review of all wait-lists and how they were handled during the year.

Posted by donotknowforsure, a resident of the Palo Alto Hills neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 4:46 pm

Is it true that all city employee families are eligible for attending PA school? If that the case, we have plenty of them coming from out of town.

Posted by Overflowed, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 4:50 pm

yap,

Let's put it this way. As recently as two years ago you used to be told your waiting list number. So you could make arrangements for preschool for your other kid, afterschool care, etc., in ways that made sense.

Now you're not told *anything*, other than, "You're not going to your local school." Why? I can't think of any good explanation. Is there favoritism going on? The algorithm for determining who gets in when should be completely public. It can't be more complex than a half a page. Right now there's no transparency so no accountability. You're darn right that if a kid got in ahead of mine I'd expect an explanation. And an explanation is due.

There are ways of making lists pseudo-public so at least someone know how many people were ahead of them.

Posted by Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 5:05 pm

PAUSD employees are eligible to send their kids to PAUSD, but not city employees. That means all employees, from teachers to janitors to bus drivers.

The kindergarten registration at least and possibly 6th and 9th grades are done by lottery once sibling preference is taken out. For this reason last spring no one was told until the end of the school year whether they had a place in the lottery or not. After the lottery takes place, there may be a wait list, but everyone who registered in time would be top of the list while new residents would have to take their turn. Presumably there was a wait list for those who registered in time too which was done by lottery. Often variables like private school take people off the wait list so do those getting into the choice programs.

If you move into the district at a different grade level, then you join the end of the wait list.

Posted by OhlonePar, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 5:14 pm

Overflowed,

You're not getting much organization because, frankly, a couple of years back some very persistent Addison parents got on the school district's case and made the board actually do something (besides debate Mandarin Immersion)--they added a bubble class to Addison and expanded the SI program at Escondido.

The less information, the less the parents can do.

Parent,

I think they don't create the waitlists until after the choice school lotteries. So there's some movement from the neighborhoods to the choice programs, but not that much.

Posted by yap, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 6:48 pm

"You're darn right that if a kid got in ahead of mine I'd expect an explanation. And an explanation is due."

If the explanation was that the child was ward of the state living with foster parents whose other children were going to that school, you think you're entitled to know that?

Posted by Mom, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 5:34 am

Does anyone have the actual numbers by grade and school of overflows? I just see the overall numbers.

Thanks!

Posted by Overflowed, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 1:17 pm

Dear yap,

Talk about strawman arguments. Of course there are situations where details should be kept private, but are you telling me the only alternative is to make *everything* private? No accountability? Where do we live, mainland China? Russia?

In any case, I'll bite. How about just saying "sibling preference" and leaving it at that.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 1:23 pm

there is a set order of priority, the district can give you the specifics. I think it's siblings of current students (incoming kinders don't get priority if their sibling is currently in 5th grade), VTP, teachers kids then wait listed kids (teachers might be after the wait list). Wait listed kids are given preference based on the date they went on the wait list.

Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 6:07 pm

Does anyone know how many kids are coming from new dense housing projects, e.g., on the old Rickey’s site?

I keep hearing that dense housing is good because it means more people will walk or bike to work and – because the homes/apartments are small – there won’t be any kids. I don’t believe any of that. Just because people live in Palo Alto, they don’t necessarily work here. And not every family with one or two kids lives in a 5,000 square foot house.

I worry about all the dense housing changing the character of our city. Councilman John Barton wants to see Palo Alto more “urban.” I live here because I prefer the suburbs. If I wanted urban life, I’d move to San Francisco.

Posted by Cathy, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 6:10 pm

I absolutely agree with Sarah Janess that we don't need new housing. How many newly developped units have been added to the school district. I am not suprised at all that our schools hit 20-year high. Do we have a school fund that hit 20-year high too?