Charter schools--public supported K-12 schools that operate independently from traditional K-12 schools within a school district--have existed since the 1970's. It has only been since the Clinton presidency, however, that they have expanded to the point where they are readily recognized for their success or failure. The risk of failure for charter schools is relatively high since their funding level is less than traditional public schools, they are experimental by definition, and the students (and their parents!) are making a conscious effort to benefit from a different kind of education.
University High School is a prime example of an outstanding charter school. Sponsored by the Fresno Unified School District, the accelerated college preparatory school opened nine years ago on the campus of California State University, Fresno. The students are challenged by an academically rigorous program that also requires participation in playing a musical instrument or related musical involvement.
As a judge of the annual Fresno County High School Academic Decathlon, I have had the opportunity to witness their outstanding school spirit and academic achievement. The relatively small 425 student school each year outscores most of the county's much larger high schools!
I was pleased to learn that the school's dream of having a campus of their own is soon to be a reality. They will be able in late 2010 to move out of their portable buildings into a new $16 million dollar facility. Ground breaking is scheduled for October.
I am so proud of the visionary educators, students, parents and community leaders that have used the charter school tool to turn a dream into a reality.
As an teacher education instructor at Fresno City College, I always use University High as a charter school success story. I look forward to taking my FCC students on a field trip to their soon-to-be gleaming new campus.
Go University High!
Coming Soon. . .
1) Do kids ride bikes anymore?
2) Fresno's choices on high speed rail and rail consolidation.
3) What's with this "Clunker" deal?
Comments are welcome. Click on "Comments" below or e-mail me at abriancalhoun@gmail.com.
In posts for January 13, April 7 and May 5 I discussed how California (and our local school districts) should take the opportunity during this difficult financial period to tap into the billions of dollars of federal stimulus funds available for two years to reshape our education system. In particular, California should do everything possible to compete for the additional $4.3 billion in discretionary "Race to the Top" stimulus education funds made available by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan to transform K -12 education in order to compete with other countries in the 21st Century. Secretary Duncan has said, however, that in order for California to compete for some of the $4.3 billion, California lawmakers would have to repeal a controversial law that prohibits linking teacher evaluations to student performance.
Governor Schwarzenegger is doing the right thing this week in calling a special legislative session for lawmakers to consider repealing the prohibition linking teacher evaluations to student performance. Repeal will not be easy for the legislature, particularly the Democrats. The California Teachers Association (CTA), the powerful affiliate of the National Teacher Association, is not supportive of the change, and the Democrats are loathe to get sideways with the CTA.
While the case can be made that the issue of teacher evaluations should be determined at the local school district level and not be dictated by Sacramento or Washington, the proposed rollback of the current prohibition linking teacher evaluations to student performance would not by itself change the teacher evaluation process. (The current prohibition against teacher evaluation by students is highly unusual among the remaining 49 states.) What it would do is to permit California to develop an innovative educational plan (which does not necessarily have to be linked to teacher evaluation) for improving public school education, submit it to the federal government and hope that it is funded.
To not even be eligible to compete for the "Race to the Top" funds would send a horrible message to California taxpayers who so generously support (by their taxes) California public schools, but who have become more and more concerned about their effectiveness.
Coming Soon. . .
1). Three cheers for University High School.
2). Fresno's choices on high speed rail and rail consolidation.
Comments are welcome. Click on "Comments" below or e-mail me at abriancalhoun@gmail.com.
During my eight years on the Fresno City Council, I could discern a significant increase in the number of city staff positions fully or partially responsible for "public information." These individuals usually had the title of "spokesperson" included in their job title or at least in their job description. Much of this growth in the perceived need for "public information" was the effort of then Mayor Alan Autry and his advisers. I found it somewhat surprising that the City Council did not push back against this increase in "public relations." The probable reason is that elected individuals almost invariably want to tell the public what a good job they are doing (after all, they were elected to do something).
The natural order of organizations, it would seem, is to expand the role of public relations. It is, for example, not much different from the organization for which I work, Fresno City College. The critical question that must be answered is: Why can't the office of mayor, president, chief executive officer, etc. put out the press release, take the phone call from the media, or delegate the responsibility to an appropriate manager? Does the organization really need one, two, three or more spokespersons? Is this an appropriate/best use of taxpayer dollars?
A recent letter to the editor of the Fresno Bee by Linda Kay Lindsey questioning Superintendent Michael Hanson's hiring a year ago of Fresno Unified's chief information officer for $125,000 only to increase it within a few months to $162,000 is an example of the "spokesperson malady" so commonly found in public institutions (I am not speaking here of private companies that may also have the same hubris but are, nevertheless, privately financed). Just the FUSD salary alone in this instance makes one wonder. The Fresno Unified chief information officer supervises two people. Compare this to the recently hired City of Fresno Planning and Development Director, with huge responsibilities and supervision of more than 200 employees, that is paid $150,000.
Another example is the Fresno County Office of Education which regularly runs paid infomercials on radio, television and newspapers extolling their services. Who needs to know that? Isn't that what they are paid to do? What is the cost of the FCEOC staff and how many taxpayer dollars are they spending promoting their organization (and, ultimately, their jobs)?
It would be interesting to have all taxpayer supported organizations in Fresno County release to the public an accounting of how much is spent directly and indirectly by their "spokespersons" on public information. The public then may be in a better position to decide the necessity of these positions.
Coming Soon. . .
1). Three cheers for University High School.
2). Will California compete in President Obama's "Academic Race to the Top?"
Comments are welcome. Click on "Comments" below or e-mail me at abriancalhoun@gmail.com.
I was disappointed, but not surprised, at the recent City Council decision not to implement the increased impact fee structure for new home development that had been tentatively approved by the former council of which I was a member. These fees (with the exception of signal fees for stop lights), essential to funding street infrastructure, fire and police facilities, and neighborhood parks, had been woefully low (many had not been adjusted for 16 years) when I came on Council in 2001.
Development fee increases were supposed to be an integral part of the adoption of the new 2025 City of Fresno General Plan. After a battle royal for almost five years to get the mayor and council to raise them to the appropriate level, the new fee structure was tentatively adopted in 2008. Unfortunately, the current council (of which I am not on having been termed out in early 2009) and mayor has given in to developer pleas of financial hardship and reduced fees to an unsustainable infrastructure support level.
It should not have taken years for the mayor and council to implement higher commercial and residential developer impact fees. This huge delay was particularly unfortunate since this period of rapid development in Fresno did not capture the appropriate level of development fees. Therefore, critical infrastructure improvements were not made.
While on the council and after seeing little movement for higher fees, I asked council in December 2004 for a comprehensive city-wide infrastructure plan that would be tied-in with updated fees that in some cases were up to 16 years old. I requested in June of 2005 that council approve the new development impact fees no later than August 2005. Since no progress was being made, in August 2006 I asked the council (which it chose not to do) to take the drastic action of instituting a moratorium on approving commercial or residential development that do not pay for themselves until the situation of fees was resolved. In January 2007 I asked council to form a subcommittee and/or bring in a mediator to resolve the fees issue. Again, no council action.
From 2001 to today, developer impact fees has played out as a pure and simple "developer versus City" issue. Developers wield undue political clout through their financial support to elected officials. Developers are also easily able to round up support from unions that are heavily invested in the building industry. They usually get what they want.
While the developer impact fee issue may appear to some to be an arcane, bureaucratic City Hall food fight, the reality is that the recent decision by Mayor Swearengin and the council will, I believe, be an historic, precedent-setting loss to city infrastructure and safety. It will impact Fresno's quality of life.
Coming Soon. . .
1). How much are we paying for "public relations?"
2). Will California compete in President Obama's "Academic Race to the Top?"
Comments are welcome. Click on "Comments" below or e-mail me at abriancalhoun@gmail.com.
The owners of the Grizzlies are at it again: "Subsidize us, City of Fresno, and we won't ask again." Recent letters to the Fresno Bee by Jerry Schemerhorn and former City Councilmember Garry Bredefeld have shown how the Grizzlies ownership group abruptly moved the Fresno Falcons ice hockey team from downtown Fresno to then more fashionable Save Mart Center. Only after losing money at the pricey Save Mart Center did they agree to return downtown if the City would upgrade, at taxpayer expense, Selland Arena. The City complied (full disclosure: even though I was hopping mad when they moved to the Save Mart Center, as a council member at that time, I supported the requested improvements to Selland). Falcons/Grizzlies Corporate Partner Chris Cummings then proceded to fold the Falcons leaving the taxpayers with the Selland property upgrades and no team.
And that wasn't all. Prior to the Falcons folding, the ownership group (which included the Grizzlies) committed themselves to developing a housing and commercial complex (The Legacy Project) on a large portion of the parking area behind Saroyan Theater. The City (to include its Redevelopment Agency) agreed to help support the Legacy only to see it eventually disappear in a chorus of excuses.
But it didn't stop there. The Grizzlies management (Falcons had long since disappeared) asked for a one dollar surcharge for every Grizzlies ticket purchased to offset their rent for the Stadium. Mayor Autry and the Council (of which I was a member) swallowed hard but eventually approved the deal.
And now they are at it again, asking for another reduction in the stadium rent! Their actions remind me of the guile used by Muhammad Ali in the famous 1974 bout in Zaire where he famously claimed that he was going to "dance" and use his speed to keep away from his opponent, George Foreman. Ali's tactic of leaning on the ropes, covering up and absorbing ineffective body shots was later to be termed "The Rope-A Dope."
Mayor Swearengin and the Council are again facing the Corporate Grizzlies Rope-A Dope. How many times do our elected leaders have to take the 10 count before they demand that the Grizzlies live up to their contract terms?
Coming Soon. . .
1). How much are we paying for "public relations?"
2). Will California compete in President Obama's "Academic Race to the Top?"
3). Mayor, Council and staff cave into developers on fees.
Your comments are welcome. Click on "Comments" below or e-mail abriancalhoun@gmail.com.
This is certainly a challenging time to be living in California. No one will deny the fact that it is hard to keep a "stiff upper lip," be optimistic about California's present and future and to, as they say, see California's glass as half full instead of half empty. As someone that was raised in California during its "Golden Age," left for 22 years, only to return to the "eighth largest economy in the world" struggling with serious financial and governance issues, I still believe that California is a great place to live and will find a way to work its way out of the its current malaise. Instead of dwelling on the negative, permit me to share with you one example why Californians want to fix our problems and continue to live here. Here's what I was able to do in this great state within a period of two weeks.
An avid Scuba diver for many years, I only half-kid my family and friends that I work in order to afford my diving. International trips to famous diving sites are wonderful--and I go when I accumulate enough greenbacks in my wallet--but I only need to drive to Ventura Harbor just above Los Angeles, clamber aboard the dive boat, Peace (along with 30 other divers), and spend two wonderful days shooting underwater pictures of marine life in the kelp forests of the Channel Islands. While the water is not as warm as the South Pacific, Caribbean or Mediterranean, the diving is affordable and the travel time is measured in only a few hours.
Leaving the Peace as it docks in Ventura Harbor, I drive a half hour north to spend the day with my daughter and son-in-law in beautiful Santa Barbara. I enjoy a run along the beach, shop with the cool dudes on State Street and finish up the day with dinner in their back yard as a beautiful sun sets in the Pacific.
And then off the next morning to Fresno where the temperature is much higher, the crops extending as far as the eye can see, Yosemite and Kings Canyon are nearby, the traffic is much lower, the pace of life a little slower and I don't have to shovel snow as I did in the East and Midwest.
Within the week I head northeast to Lake Tahoe to visit with and assist my sister at her community market. I also take the opportunity to hike Squaw Valley's Shirley Canyon, winding my way up along the mid-summer stream as it languidly descends the canyon leaving cool, refreshing pools for bathers to slide into and then dry off on the surrounding granite.
I climb high enough through the canyon whereby I am very near the Tram's debarkation point, leaving summer visitors on top of Squaw's highest peak where winter skiers begin their descent to the valley below. I can see for miles, to include Lake Tahoe. I decide to rest in the shade as the mid-afternoon sun slants through the trees. I munch on some trail mix I brought along and read All the Pretty Horses, Cormack McCarthy's trilogy of the American West.
As I retrace my steps down Shirley Canyon, I remind myself how fortunate I am to live in California: In less than two weeks I have been Scuba diving below below the ocean surface, watched the sunset over Santa Barbara, relaxed in the friendliness of Fresno in the Central Valley, and hiked to a mountain top over 8000 feet to read a book and view one of the most pristine lakes in the world. And all of this at reasonable distance and cost.
Yes, California has its challenges. But let's work to meet those challenges so we can continue, as in my small example, to enjoy the fruits of this wonderful state.
Coming Soon. . .
1). How much are we paying for "public relations?"
2). Will California compete in President Obama's "Academic Race to the Top?"
Your comments are welcome. Click on "Comments" below or e-mail abriancalhoun@gmail.com.
Following a nation-wide search, the City of Fresno selected Mr. John Dugan as the City's new Planning and Development Director. He will begin work on September 1. Based on what I know of his background (I don't know him personally), he is an excellent choice.
Mr. Dugan's academic credentials are impressive: Master's Degree in City Planning from Harvard's Graduate School of Design and Kennedy School of Government. It's his experience, however, that should be a great asset to Fresno. Let's begin by looking at his current position as Deputy Director of Planning for the City of Los Angeles, where he manages the city's community planning programs. We will then turn to his experience as the Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Planning Director. But first, Los Angeles.
Three cities have implemented different approaches to combat vacant building space and spur growth in depressed areas, typically downtown or industrial areas. Denver, New York City and Los Angeles have all developed adaptive reuse ordinances to provide incentives to property owners to reoccupy their buildings for housing and commercial purposes. Though Denver was the first to implement an adaptive reuse ordinance, Los Angeles has had the most success. As of 2006, Los Angeles had already reused 3,700 buildings, while 5,400 buildings were finishing the process, and 7,000 buildings had applied to the program but had not yet begun the work. These numbers are much higher today.
The Los Angeles Adaptive Reuse Ordinance provides several substantial incentives for building owners. First, the ordinance relaxes the building codes applicable to the building. This means that buildings in commercial zones could be held accountable only to residential building codes when adapted for reuse. Residential building codes are less strict in their requirements for indoor lighting, parking spaces, proper number of restrooms, etc. Second, the ordinance includes "by-right processing" - the property owner can bypass Planning Commission approval, Council approval, and environmental approval because: 1) the building already exists; 2) the adaptive reuse is only applied to the interior of the building (and minor exterior work); and 3) the ordinance includes a "Master EIR" for the Los Angeles downtown area. The owner only has to obtain the proper permits for the rehabilitation work and is only subjected to inspection fees, not any of the other fees associated with the development process (i.e. Planning Commission and EIR fees). Finally, the Los Angeles adaptive reuse ordinance also exempts the owner from any development fees and restrictions, including typical floor area ratios and open space requirements. Moreover, street fees or infrastructure fees are not levied against the property, even if significant rehabilitation is involved.
As a former City of Fresno Councilmember, I brought forward in 2006 and the Council discussed options for working with Planning and Development staff , staff from the Economic Development Department, and staff from the Redevelopment Agency to address the vacant space problem in Downtown. Fresno, however, faces an unique situation when addressing this problem. Unlike Denver, Los Angeles and New York City, Fresno does not benefit from high rent prices in Downtown. Reuse projects in Los Angeles are immediately economically viable because the buildings are tall and rent is high, translating into significant revenue from housing uses (many rooms x high rent), giving developers financial "cover" while the investment for office use, which takes longer to turn a profit, matures. Adaptive reuse is more profitable in Los Angeles, Denver, and New York City because it is cheaper and easier than redevelopment, both of which could combine housing and office elements. Consequently, while staff was asked to look into an adaptive reuse ordinance in Fresno, they were also asked to study what types of incentives will encourage developers to reuse vacant downtown buildings.
Additionally, the type of vacant building is a factor. Staff was asked to evaluate the types of buildings that constitute the 1,926,364 square feet of vacant space in Downtown. Not all buildings present viable options for reuse. Many single-story buildings - particularly, large, single-story industrial warehouses - are not good candidates for adaptive reuse projects because they are not profitable for the developer.
Fresno's ordinance needed to provide as many options as possible for projects that pose challenges to reuse. Previous reuse projects in Fresno, especially the JC Penny Building on the Fulton Mall and the Hotel Fresno, provide examples of effective and ineffective, approaches. Staff was asked to examine those case studies for clues to how a comprehensive ordinance will quicken the process. As a former council member, I requested and the Council directed in September 2006 that City staff develop an adaptive reuse ordinance for Fresno. Staff was asked to consider tailoring the Los Angeles adaptive reuse ordinance, or others, to Fresno or to create an original ordinance specific to Fresno.
Staff was further directed to provide incentives that would encourage developers to reuse vacant buildings, especially in downtown. The need for an adaptive reuse ordinance was expressed during Mayor Swearengin's public hearing a few months ago on downtown Fresno. City of Fresno staff, surprisingly, responded that nothing had been done to develop an adaptive reuse ordinance. This lack of progress on an adaptive reuse ordinance was disingenuous at best, particularly after assuring the Council numerous times since 2006 that one was being developed.
I encourage Mayor Swearengin to take advantage of Mr. Dugan's experience in Los Angeles and be more proactive than former Mayor Autry in insisting on having staff immediately prepare an adaptive reuse ordinance for Council and public consideration.
Mr. Dugan's experience in Los Angeles would probably be enough to move Fresno forward. Fortunately, he also combines experience as the Planning Director for the City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma where, working in tandem with a visionary mayor, was largely responsible for a major renovation of their downtown, something badly needed for Fresno. I would encourage readers to visit http://www.okccvb.org/ for an overview of the City or, better yet, http://www.bricktownokc.com/ for a view of their bustling Bricktown Business and Entertainment Center.
Welcome, Mr. Dugan. Financial constraints are a challenge, but your experience, vision and hard work can make Fresno a FresYes.
Coming Soon. . .
1). Amidst all the problems, California is a wonderful place to live.
2). Will California compete in President Obama's "Academic Race to the Top?"
Your comments are welcome: Click on "comments" below or e-mail abriancalhoun@gmail.com.It was recently reported by the Fresno Bee that the City of Clovis has taken a page from the Caltrans adopt-a-highway program with a plan to get community members to adopt medians and defray city costs. Kudos to Clovis!
Clovis's landscape maintenance program had been hit hard by budget woes. Three years ago, the city had 18 workers to take care of 180 acres of parks and medians. Today, the city has eight people covering 207 acres.
Under the new program, businesses, service clubs, families and individuals can underwrite the costs for median landscaping. The money will pay for city workers or landscape contractors to maintain the medians. Each quarter mile median will cost $2,000 to $5,500 annual depending on the location and greenery. In exchange, two signs containing a donor's name will be placed in medians publicizing the contribution.
More than two years ago when I was a member of the Fresno City Council, I requested staff to consider instituting a median landscape maintenance program. City staff never followed through. This was unfortunate since I had the support of a number of businesses willing and ready to adopt median island landscapes near their place of business.
My mistake, in hindsight, was to personally request Public Works to look into the possibility and report back to council. Knowing what I know today about city-hall bureaucracy, my action should have been to bring the concept to council for a vote directing staff to follow-through.
Oh well, what is done is done. I would, however, encourage the current council and mayor to follow the lead of Clovis and make Fresno's median islands more attractive at little or no cost to the taxpayer by establishing an "adopt-a-median" landscaping ordinance.
Coming Soon. . .
1). Amidst all the problems, California is a wonderful place to live.
2). Solid choice for Fresno's new Planning and Development Director.
Your comments are always welcome: Click on "comments" below or e-mail abriancalhoun@gmail.com
I don't post very often on national issues. I thought, however, that an opinion piece by Ted Van Dyk in the July 17 Wall Street Journal on the topic, "Obama Needs to 'Reset' His Presidency" was particularly useful, and I wanted to pass it along to my readers. Mr. Van Dyk was Vice President Hubert Humphrey's assistant in the Johnson White House and active in national Democratic politics over 40 years. He is the author of "Heroes, Hacks and Fools," (University of Washington Press, 2008).
Mr. Van Dyk suggests in his article that President Obama should take a time out. He says that "our economic distress is deeper than we thought, and thus your health-care and energy initiatives are in danger of stalling out. You could use a reset button for domestic policy." Mr. Van Dyk then continues at some length as to how issues facing President Obama aren't similar to those of other presidents facing major challenges and, therefore, he should seek to solve them in a principled, measured way. Permit me to quote from Mr. Van Dyk the adjustments he believes President Obama should make.
"Cut back both your proposals and expectations. You made promises about jobs that would be "created and saved" by the stimulus package. Those promises have not held up. You continue to engage in hyperbole by claiming that your health-care and energy plans will save tax dollars. The Congressional Budget Office analysis indicates otherwise. It's time to re-examine these initiatives. Could your health plan be scaled back to catastrophic coverage for all--badly needed by most families, but quite affordable if deductibles are set at the right levels? Should the Rube Goldbergian cap-and-trade proposals be replaced with a simple carbon tax, with proceeds to be allocated to alternative-fuels development?
The evolving health and cap-and-trade bills are loaded with costly provisions designed to gain support from congressional leaders and special-interest constituencies. In short, they have become an expensive mess. This legislation will not clear Congress by the August recess, as you have requested, and could be stalled for the remainder of 2009. Settle for incremental change: Do not press Democratic legislators to vote for something they fear will destroy
them in 2010.
Talk less and pick your spots. You are outdoing even former Presidents' Johnson and Clinton with your daily speeches in the capital and around the country. Applause and adulation are gratifying. But the more you talk, the less weight your words will hold. Let voters see you at your desk, conferring with serious people about serious matters. When you do choose to talk, people will understand that it's important and they should listen.
Conform your 2009 politics to your 2008 statements. During your campaign, you called for bipartisanship and bridge-building. You promised to reduce the influence of single-issue and single-interest groups in the policy process. Yet, in your public statements, you keep using President Bush as a scapegoat.
You have ceded content of your principal proposals to Democratic congressional leaders who in large part have yielded to special-interest constituencies and excluded Republican leaders from policy formulation. This certainly was the case with the stimulus plan. It has been the case with health and energy legislation, with the notable exception of Senator Max Baucus's attempt in the Senate Finance Committee to develop genuinely bipartisan legislation.
You have an enormous reservoir of goodwill among Americans of all persuasions. They want you to succeed. Level with them and trim your proposals to what is practical in the current environment.
You had things right in 2008. Take a timeout. Get back to yourself. Make a fresh start."
Coming Soon. . .
1). Amidst all the problems, California is a wonderful place to live.
2). Why doesn't Fresno have an "adopt-a-median" landscaping program?
Your comments are always welcome. Just click on "Comments" below.
