Recent Interview with Judy Miner on Cubberley & HSTF Schools & Kids, posted by Susan Hong, Mountain View Voice Reporter, a resident of another community, on Sep 24, 2007 at 12:33 pm
In a recent interview I did with Judy Miner, President of Foothill College and member of the Palo Alto High School Task Force, I asked her what she thought of the high school's task force's decision not to open a third comprehensive high school at Cubberley.
"I'm thrilled," she said.
Currently the college has 19,000 students, and Miner wants to see the school expand to 25,000 in five years. She particularly wants to expand the "Middlefield campus," housed in the Cubberley Community Center in Palo Alto. The off-campus site offers a pharmacy tech program and emergency medical training, but the college has a new name in the works as part of a bigger and better school: The Northern California Center for Career Pathways.
"We really need that space and I think there is incredible potential there," Miner said. "What we want to do is develop a new career program that would be housed at Middlefield and provide enough general education coursework, so if a student chose, they could do their entire program at the Middlefield campus."
By the fall of 2008, the Middlefield campus may offer child development programs, she said. Foothill is also working closely with Mountain View and Los Altos high schools to offer more college credit courses.
Posted by Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2007 at 1:14 pm
This is really interesting. As to why someone from Foothills is on the HSTF in anything other than an advisory position is a good question. Yes, I can see that there are possibly reasons why having someone from Foothills, to put the middle college point of view across would make sense, but only in an advisory status. For this individual to have voting rights on what this group recommends sounds dubious to begin with. But, it is obvious that there is a bigger problem with conflict of interest in this case and that should be highlighted so that perhaps the Task Force can vote again without this individual's vote being counted, The conflict of interest position must be taken into account on any discussion items this individual has taken part in.
Posted by Midtown Mom, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2007 at 1:26 pm
I agree. There seems to be a blatant conflict of interest. The high school advisory should be able to determine what is best for PAUSD, and not be swayed by whether the college has designs on the space.
Posted by Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2007 at 3:31 pm
Well maybe the fees that Foothill pays to PAUSD for the use of Cubberly are quite elastic - if they've got so much of a fabulous future designed around the use of Cubberely. Meaning - PAUSD, raise the fees for the use of this space, and since they want the facility so much, they should be willing to pay for it. And that will be how we can fund our capacity problems.
Its great for Foothill College's needs (which means, the needs of jr. college students all over the bay area), to be so comfortably taken care of through their use of our Cubb facility - while the needs of our own Palo Alto kids go completlely unaddressed.
Posted by Rick, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2007 at 11:19 pm
I certainly hope that Foothill College is also looking for other locations for the classes. With the possibility of thousands of households coming to Palo Alto in the future it should be obvious that the campus, Cubberly, will be needed for a third High School in Palo Alto in the not to distant future.
Maybe the future Mitchell Park library/ Community center can add space for these classes if Foothill College helps pay for it.
Also the classes should be directed toward Palo Alto residents and especially Seniors.
How much is Foothill College paying in rent fees to the city or school system?? The campus looks run down and in need of a lot of money for its upkeep.
Posted by Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2007 at 12:39 pm
If the HSTF is set up the same way as the AAAG was, then yes the role is to advise the superintendent and board on what was supposed to be relevant after deliberations. But, the AAAG did have votes on what information and what advice was forwarded on. Nothing was made into policy and the board rejected the advice of the AAAG. The same could happen here. But there was still an opportunity for each member to give their opinion and those opinions were taken into account by the whole group. In my opinion, every member is a contributor to the whole, so yes, their advisory structure to the board is relevant.