Among the stupidities committed by previous school administrations and blessed by school boards, the shortsighted decision to sell school property 40 years ago. During a brief period, enrollments dropped for about 5 years. My son, born 1977, was among that group of schoolchildren who were sometimes placed in combined classes (2nd and 3rd together) because enrollment had declined. But like the Stock Market, what goes down will eventually climb back up again. And in desirable South County, the inevitable happened, about 1990. Among the schools sold: beautiful Garfield Elementary School in Oak Park. It's now SBCC's Schott Center. My husband attended Garfield when it first opened in 1934, his grandmother a charter member of the PTA. Ken walked 1 block to school. Today's kids are transported to Adams School, across busy Las Positas. Postscript: Hope District did it right. During those years of dropped enrollment, the district rented Hope School to Montessori. Vieja Valley and Monte Vista (Eric's school) remained open. As the district prepared for the uptick, they took over Hope and fixed her up and voila! -- 3 fine schools serving all the district's families. Imagine if Hope had done as Santa Barbara and Goleta.
Thank you for pointing out the shining example of the Hope District, which re-opened its downtown elementary school. Hope district has no transportation costs.
Bonnie, thank you so much for drawing our attention to this vital group and movement- we must return schools to local neighborhoods to start to recover vital community and culture that is eroding year by year. We have lost so much that benefits our children by bussing and going to schools that are not in our neighborhoods- All of us should promote and support this movement for the betterment of Santa Barbara families and the well being of our wonderful city!!!
Alice, there are many more things to name not to mention a return to the principle of subsidiarity- where what can be done competently ought to be done at the most local level- we have to return education and schools to local communities!!!
Growing up in the 1950's when attending public schools, parental involvement was a given.
There was no other support mechanism other than what parents were willing to provide through volunteer efforts on behalf of their own children. Parental engagement was a natural extension of our K-12 experience. Parents served as official liaisons through PTA organizations, volunteered to serve hot lunches, provide labor on work days to enhance school landscaping and repair playground equipment, help organize school bake sales, and chaperone school field trips.
Then after 1962 came the teachers unions. Alienation of public schools from the families they served became the new fact of life. Different times today, but one needs to recognize what we had at one time and what we lost when the teachers unions came to stand between parents and their children, during these important early years of public education.
Yes to no on teachers unions. In general, the idea of government employment, was service. Now it’s a lifetime of support. The notion that unions ought to be excluded from any government service jobs is tempting.
Thank you for sharing about parents. One of the biggest benefits of neighborhood schools is increased parental participation because the school is close and accessible to home.
Thank you for writing, Bonnie. J. Livingston, you don't mention what I believe drove a wedge into local schools: busing. The local schools were mandated to accept kids from totally different social/economic districts. This short sighted idea was the exact point, however. The result was the demise of the local school concept, which was working very well, except for poorer districts. The disadvantaged schools cried out because their kids didn't have the same resources the better districted schools had: busing was their answer; result? dumb everyone down to less than mediocre. The better schools had better teachers and parental funding (of course). I've thought that leaving the kids in their home districts made more sense (in case of emergencies, etc.) and family disruption. "Busing" the teachers would have been more a productive result. Lower income districts could offer better pay to entice the better trained teachers; I don't know how it would work exactly, but each bus cost thousands and drivers have pensions (add in the logistics folks) not really paying for education.
There are many ways to circumvent equalization of funding for public schools, and still deprive students of quality education. It is not alway about the money, but internal school policies, formal and informal, as well.
. The legendary case that got a trial court verdict in favor of the students was Vegara vs LAUSD which proved there is a "dance of the lemons" that disproportionately placed teachers on probation or low performance ratings primarily in the lower income neighborhood schools. Trial court agree this violated the US Constitution guarantee of equal protection.
The court set out multi-part reform measures that needed to be undertaken as a result of this trial's findings. Teachers union with Gov Brown's blessings, appealed and overturned those findings. And LAUSD went back to business as usual.
"I've thought that leaving the kids in their home districts made more sense (in case of emergencies, etc.) and family disruption." Yes.
Thank you, Michael, for pointing out one of the biggest benefits of neighborhood schools: parental convenience and involvement, vs family disruption.
Thank you also for pointing out safety and emergency preparedness as well.
Neighborhood schools are essential infrastructure for the community in addition to being an educational resource. Infrastructure for after school, for weekends, for emergencies. To not have a neighborhood school in one's own neighborhood where children (and residents without children as well) can play after school and on the weekend and where families can gather in the event of an emergency, that was a big loss to the essential infrastructure of Santa Barbara. Those school buildings made the city a better place to live for everyone.
Santa Barbara lost THREE pieces of essential infrastructure when the District sold its three downtown schools - Downtown Eastside (Lincoln), Downtown Westside (Wilson) & Downtown Oak Park/Cottage Hospital (Garfield). This disastrous decision has resulted in a loss of neighborhood cohesion 24/7, far beyond the loss of what happened there during the school day. We still have Garfield campus, owned by SB City College. We need to open its doors to the more than 500 students who live within walking distance of it currently and give it back to the neighborhood.
Santa Barbara also lost Jefferson School on the Riviera. Essential community-owned infrastructure.
It is also true that public schools were fully funded in the 1950s and 1960s. Bake sales were for extras. All sports transportation, campus maintenance, etc. were paid for by the district. During the 1950s and 1960s, all neighborhood school playgrounds were staffed by UCSB/SBCC students after school and on Saturdays so neighborhood kids had a place to go and play pick-up games of softball, etc. "Going up to the playground" was a common refrain back in the day as kids had a sense of place. Santa Barbara schools in the 1950s and 1960s were funded equivalent to the funding of Montecito schools today (adjusted for inflation). Of course, taxes were higher and Prop. 13 hadn't been enacted--never underestimate the power of actually having the funds to do the right thing by students AND taxpayers. Taxpayers all benefitted from fully funded schools because schools are public buildings. Taxpayers bought the land and built the buildings. Cutting back on available funding for maintaining those buildings has diminished their value and caused a huge backlog of maintenance so that more bond issues must be passed simply to keep up.
Haha Laura. Revenue is not the problem. Spending priorities are SBUSD’s problem. Properties could be maintained if money not wasted on District level Administrators and social programs. You work for SBUSD. You ought to know.
Wow...presume much? I do not work for SBUSD. I am a native Santa Barbarian who went to Roosevelt, SBJH, and SBHS. I graduated during the golden age of local public schools and fully funded public education. Back in those days (1960s) the district maintained schools very well. I agree that SBUSD has way too many highly compensated administrators.
I think you are giving teachers unions a bad rap. What EXACTLY is wrong with paying teachers well? And it was actually the Civil Rights movement that gave both blacks and women the right to apply for any job for which they were qualified. (And why shouldn't women want to be lawyers, scientists, business executives?) Yes, many of my teachers in the 1950s were women (who had fewer options) but many were also men who were able to support their families on a single salary. Teachers pay was more in line with the economy at that time. Prop 13 put a stop to that...and that has been a huge problem. After all, Prop 13 also froze the property tax rates for corporations ---- Edison, So Cal Gas, Northrup Grumman, commercial properties all over the state, etc. Those entities never actually "sell" their property and thus those properties never get reappraised at market value. It is (once again) about the top 1%!
Top 1% in this state already pays 40% of all state taxes, and are moving out of the state as a result. Undermining Prop 13 by demanding a split roll taxation formula additionally will have unforeseen consequences.
Do you still think Calif #45 standing is all about money? Which makes it hard to explain Mississippi's recent dramatic rise student success outcomes, apparently just by making phonics their required state reading formula.
State by state K-12 funding data for "base amount" per student; not the total amount as there are other sources of funding, bond issues and parcel tax funding as well.
California K-12 base amount funding is among the top nationwide.
Prop 98 was intended to cure the Prop 13 perceived public education funding deficiencies, with the Prop 98 50% share of all general funds going automatically to K-12. Plus the equalizing of K-12 funding throughout the states so there are no more "rich districts and poor districts".
How much more of the state budget besides this automatic 50% should schools get today? How much in fact do they get. And what part of state government should gives up their current share? With property owners in addition still funding school capital improvement projects through bond issues and additional free flow funding for schools by passing parcel taxes, the total funding going to public eduction well exceeds just the Prop 98 allocation.
What exactly was the classroom improvement outcomes when Gov Brown allocated even more bonus funding, under his local control funding plan (LCFF) to under-performing California schools? Did any school show improvements related to those extra funds? What were the best practices this extra funding demonstrated.
It is no longer just an issue about money. But something else. Let's hope the teaching profession will lead the way to better classroom outcomes. And that voters finally break away from responding only to teacher union election endorsements. That realtionship has become a school for failure in this state.
It is also always tricky making full compensation package comparisons for the teaching 9 -month 'working year" compared to other occupation's more standard 12 month working year.
As an aside, this prop 98 formula seems problematic. It mandates 50% of the general fund goes to education. But what if there are fewer students, or more students. As this number changes, the 50% of tax fund stays the same. It is a poor mechanism that cannot adjust to demographics. Likely put in by the teachers unions lobby as a guarantee for busloads of funding. Just a guess here.
I have no problem with smaller classrooms and more per pupil funding, which can translate as higher pay, if that is the way Prop 98 works during periods declining enrollments. Hell to pay though when student populations go up and their sharing of Prop 98 automatic funding creates "pay cuts". What is egregious however in this whole automatic education funding stream, is there are no student outcome accountability standards to get any of this money.
Plus the education unions go apoplectic when there is a decline in general fund revenues -- what happened to their "fair share"? They only like this when the general fund revenues go up, and take no responsibility for creating the poor business climate and legislative micromanaging in this state, that is now seeing state revenues go down.
Those that chose to work for taxpayer-supported institutions need to invest in the overall health of the state economy, instead of spending 13 years teaching their students to hate America and hate capitalism. And see ever increasing taxation on someone else as the sole answer to all their own self-imposed ills.
I am sorry for the students of today who miss out on either walking to school with their friends, or standing together waiting for the school bus (without the helicopter parents/guardians hovering over them). Also, in my neighborhood, there are many school age kids, but you would never know it because after school is over, they hustle into their homes never to been seen again. When I grew up in Santa Barbara during the late 1940s, after Peabody school let out, we were never to be seen at home until dark, when my parents rang a large metal triangle, which was loud enough to be heard far away. Thinking of the games we played, the togetherness so sadly missing today. KIds, stop playing with your phones and computers - get outside and play baseball and jacks and marbles again! And read comics after jumping rope and hopscotching.
Neighborhood schools are so important. Thanks for the trip down memory lane. The Coalition for Neighborhood Schools knows that those days can be recreated. Coalitionforneighborhoodschools.com
Thank you, Carol, for sharing your own personal neighborhood school story. Thank you for sharing the fitness benefits and the “togetherness” benefits which come from going to school in your own neighborhood with the kids who live in your neighborhood. My definition of a neighborhood school is “walking home after school to your friend’s house to play (or to the Boys and Girls Club ) ! “ Kids today are driven everywhere! Private school, charter schools, magnet schools, homeschooling. And that’s great, but at CNS we believe the neighborhood school is the best alternative for the vast majority of children. Most parents just want a good public school in their neighborhood. If we give that back to parents and establish a neighborhood school concept in Santa Barbara, I believe much of that neighborhood play and “togetherness” can be regained - even if it’s indoors at the friend’s house or backyard rather than free roaming the streets like we used to do. Thanks for your wonderful comment.
No to the green agenda. But walkable local schools have long played a role in just plain Americana. I even walked a mile on my own to our local kindergarten. I still remember my mother showing me the route and introducing me to neighbors along the way, in case I ever needed help. Then later a K-6 school was built closer by, then a walkable Jr High and walkable HS. As our SF-Bay Area community itself sprawled out post WWII, they did add school busses later.
Well hasn’t it always been this way.. I would walk home every day from SBJH n SBHS to our home on Charlotte Lane (passed the old mission) but I would cut through Rocky Nook Park.. with the exception of when I went to Marymount .. those roads are pretty tight but have walked them as well..
Wouldn’t the solution be to simply stop bussing children to other districts .. ?
Jenn--That is a serious walk (all up hill!). The SB district isn't bussing to other districts but it is bussing students from downtown (where there is no district elementary school) all the way up to the Mesa elementary schools! Hard on the kids and hard for parents to participate in PTA, etc.
J. Livingston...you have described my childhood and school-going experience as well. I love that your mother showed you the route (as did mine) and I walked to school from Kindergarten on with my neighborhood pals. And, yes, we know folks along the way---who often were in their yard to say hello! I so want that for the downtown kids in Santa Barbara.
So on the one hand the kids are being subjected to the WOKE propaganda and on the other they’re victims of proselytising.
Right now, the United States is under attack from something called “The Seven Mountain Mandate, which originated in the 1970s and seeks to transform society into a “Christian” one by controlling seven key factors of life: family, religion, media, education, government, business, and arts/entertainment. They typically back Trump, which is why we see so many bizarre analogies of Trump to Christ (heresy the MAGAs lap up). In 2012, journalist Katherine Stewart published The Good News Club: The Christian Right’s Stealth Assault on America’s Children, describing the local controversy that erupted when Good News Club came to Seattle's Loyal Heights Elementary School and chronicling what she learned as an undercover reporter at CEF's triennial National Convention in 2010. Separately, Stewart has reported on complaints by parents of children of other faiths being warned, by their Good News Club classmates, that they may go to hell,[27] and of Good News Club's teaching, as an object lesson on obedience, of I Samuel 15:3's divine imperative to "attack the Amalekites" and "put to death men and women, children and infants."[28] Stewart clarifies the fundamentalist and Christian nationalist nature of CEF and the Good News Club. She emphasizes that "religious fundamentalists want to be in the public schools because they want to "take back" the public schools and repurpose them with a fundamentalist Christian agenda.
➡️Young children cannot distinguish between an activity that takes place in their public school and one that is endorsed by their public school.
Again, bringing Christianity onto school campuses is problematic and stupid, but the people behind it know damn well what they’re doing: confusing children.
Let me cite journalist Katherine Stewart:
“…Young children cannot distinguish between an activity that takes place in their public school and one that is endorsed by their public school. They think if something happens in the school, it must have the stamp of state authority, it must be what the school wants them to believe, it must be what they should believe.... That's why these Good News Clubs ... are so intent on getting their programs in the public schools."
I read up on this good news club and… to join the club, parents must sign and enroll their student. So it’s not exactly forced on or exposed to all students.
It is a 1st amendment issue of free speech and freedom of religion, (not freedom from religion). We’ll see how much enthusiasm parents have when for instance, a Muslim group wants to start an
It’s clear that it’s designed to confuse children into think Christianity is State-sanctioned through the public schools. Developmentally and psychologically, a child exposed to this proselytizing won’t be able to separate church and state.
The point being that in America, Christians may expect to be allowed a voluntary afterschool club. But what if… A satanic club wants to open up an afterschool program? Students for Satan. What if. Because that is a known religion and if one religion gets in so must others be allowed in.
The clubs are voluntary, with parents agreement. And there are already gay clubs, bi clubs, trans clubs, why not a satan club? The reason is a moral one. Because few parents would find students for satan acceptable, and few would sign their kids up to such a club.
But what they did? What if a Muslim club started up pushing the whole Gaza episode, and blaming other religious groups for mass violence in Gaza? And threatening violence to those other groups. What then?
Is the school supposed to decide which religions are allowed afterschool privileges? Based on what criteria?
Because if they do decide to exclude some while allowing others, there will be religious freedom 1st amendment federal lawsuits by the excluded religious group.
The answer is somewhere in the public property and public purpose that schools are built on. And the idea that public schools are meant to serve, to educate, to bring up new citizens with knowledge, wisdom and morals.
And after school, that public property may continue to serve that public which owns the facility for the public’s benefit.
The first amendment guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion, and this often overlooked distinction means that the government shall remain neutral to religion. Neither promoting nor hindering religion. And, that government must allow all to believe in whatever religion they want to believe in. However abhorrent.
Excluding all religions from a public school site, in an afterschool setting has been determined by SCOTUS for instance, as placing an undue government pressure against religion, violating the 1st amendment.
And so that translates to allowing after school, religious clubs, after school economic clubs, after school philosophy clubs.
Maybe excluding after school sex clubs would be seen as wise.. Because our morals even today would not allow prurient clubs for pre teens and teens.
So the final constitutional analysis is that all religious clubs must be allowed to use afterschool public facilities, or none shall be allowed. And our current courts and the nation in general are on the OK for religious use of school facilities side of things.
Would a satan club have any chance? Constitutionally yes, but locally maybe no. Most parents would rise up and vote out school officials that allowed such a club. Although maybe in Portland… Because schools are still part of our local communities, parents and taxpayers have some vestigial say in school matters. Even though Sacramento is ever gathering more power over local school decisions, parents can still vote locally to remove school board members with wildly abhorrent anti pedagogical views. Because when it comes to parents, most are protective of their children, and expect some degree of morality from their schools.
And pointing out here that morality, in today’s secular world, however weak, is a leftover echo from our religious heritage. And that schools used to be the very place parents expected morals to be taught, studied and observed. Now, with today’s secular schools where does morality come from?
The Humanists would have children learn from DEI programs, which in themselves are a ‘new’ religion, adopted with evangelical fervor and thrust upon young children by teachers during school hours as dogmatic curriculum.
And so the moralities impressed upon yesterday’s students, have now been replaced by humanism, socialism, DEI, CRT. It seems tame and quaint that a few Christians wish to offer afterschool lessens in old time morality to willing and interested students.
Speaking of “problematic and stupid” McGrune, your characterization of the Good News Club is yet another example of the woke agenda and misinformation in our schools.
The last school board meeting I attended at SBUSD, was an embarrassing attempt by our elected school board members in silencing parents from exercising their constitutional right of free speech. Were you there?
No, the threat to our schools is not the activity of a voluntary school club spreading the word of peace, love and Christ. The real threat to our schools is the indoctrination of our children by a variety of influences promoted by the woke, liberal establishment, in lock step with the Democratic Party.
Sure, the queer agenda, climate activism and hysteria, racial animus directed at whites, destain for anything Christian or Jewish and anti American propaganda are just a sample of what our children are subjected to, all endorsed and promoted by the Teachers Union. The good news? Parents and taxpayers are not remaining silent anymore.
Do you know what’s even better that the Good News Club? Parents privately taking their kids to an off site church of their choosing. What this organization is doing is trying to deliberately confuse kids into thinking The State of California endorses Christianity. 😂
BTW, California was FOUNDED on Christianity, specifically Catholicism. Should students be taught that, or should it be hidden for fear of “confusing “ them?
It was founded on The Doctrine of Discovery, in which the Catholic Church gave itself permission to obliterate the indigenous peoples and steal all they had. We need to stop the further colonization of this land.
Did I ever say “give it back to the Chumash” or did I point out that the origins of the State were, in fact, based on a history of religious and financial motivation?
The threat to our schools is the data collection and unpaid child labor at the behest of corporations & laws that remove local control in favor of planned economies through things like the Every Student Succeeds Act and the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. Removal of local control and data collection (as information as sensitive as children’s attitudes, values, beliefs and behaviors) is thrusting our society into a dystopia where kids are nothing more than a global workforce in a dystopian gig economy.
Alice Linahan in perhaps the most knowledgeable person on the subject of returning education to local populations and ridding it of globalist ideology and vicious data collection.
Right now in Texas the Republican led government is globalizing and destroying schools unlike any other time in history. True conservatives are aligned with some on the “left” in some of their arguments against what’s happening, but the key is bipartisan consensus and solutions for this, because the well being of children, parents and teachers is of utmost concern. We all have the same best interests at heart, despite it all.
Teachers don’t “get it” and have been taught themselves incorrectly, not aware of the dangers of things like SEL (social emotional learning). The public doesn’t seem to give a damn because the life of a child is cheap (eg they’re not taxpayers or voters).
What’s needed is an appeal to all sides for reform against the predatory technology as well as the woke crap.
Oh boy, it’s a long and disquieting story, but Texas Republicans are leading the way with the globalization of education with their ESAs/vouchers “school choice” legislation… keep in mind we already have school choice, what they’re doing is making all areas of education tied to the federal government, with all its surveillance and data collection—- that means previously independent schools and homeschools will be subject to the very things they have been trying to escape. Instead of fixing public schools they’re usurping all kinds of education at the expense of taxpayers… and… they’re using UNESCO Open Education Resources (blockchain)! That means curriculum can be modified whenever, which parents can’t see… there are some conservatives that have been opposed to this but their spineless representatives ignore them. Alice Linahan and Lynn Davenport, two true champions of this nation (who are also conservative Republicans) have been pointing out what’s happening. They are the best people in this nation… once the globalists get ahold of Texas education they can destroy so many other parts of it in other states… Texas educates 10% of the nations kids, plus they have a lot of water…
When you give something—especially in the name of help—you should ask: does this act have long-term, harmful consequences? That same question must be asked of Senate Bill 2, now passed and signed into law. SB 2 is being sold as a win for parental rights, but in reality, it establishes the infrastructure for universal, government-regulated “school choice” in Texas—an Orwellian system of centralized data collection, ideological compliance, and behavioral monitoring. This is not liberty—this is submission by design. And the path was paved by Democrats, but is now being executed with precision by Republicans.
But, let’s dig deeper.
This is No Longer About Education—This Is a Global Psychological Operation
The Texas Legislature has become ground zero for a sweeping and coordinated assault on American sovereignty, parental rights, and childhood innocence. At the center of this assault? Your child’s school.
And behind the curtain? Globalists and Islamists, two distinct forces with different theologies—but the same strategic goal: Hijack the education system to track, modify, and control the values, beliefs, and behaviors of American children. Through school choice legislation, social-emotional learning, federal compliance metrics, and behavioral surveillance, both factions are seizing soft power over the soul of this nation. Texas is not resisting—it’s leading the charge. SB 2: The Trojan Horse for Universal State-Controlled Education
Marketed as a win for parents, Texas Senate Bill 2 creates Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) regulated by the Texas Comptroller and ultimately the Texas Education Agency (TEA). Participation requires compliance with federal College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR) metrics—tied directly to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA).
This is not educational freedom. It’s digital compliance disguised as choice.
Under SB 2, even homeschoolers and private school students are tracked, evaluated, and eventually regulated. The TEA—run by unelected Commissioner Mike Morath—controls the statewide longitudinal data based system put in place through federal dollars. You just get to pick your prison cell.
Mcgrune- you don’t know what you are talking about! It is not a choice of whether or not there is religion in the schools it is a choice of which religion, yours is clearly secular humanism, which is the most destructive religion in history- it has even destroyed your common sense!
There is no reason to use a public school for religious education other than to conflate the two. There are dozens of even better facilities the good news club can utilise. I’m a conservative.
You do have a few points that sound conservative- but you are in fact an ideologue- which means you make an idol out of your own ideas- it appears as if you can’t distinguish between fact and ideological talking point- it at least you are in the conversation-
In a lot of ways I’m more conservative than anyone I know, but I’m an original thinker who gets pummeled when they dare suggest kids can be taught Christianity in Churches and the academics at public schools, separately so that the both have the opportunity to thrive.
You should not get pummeled unless you say something silly, and here you are saying something silly, not at all original- here is a truth for you- there is no such thing as culture or education that is separate from religion- it is impossible because religion is an aspect of human life and religion is the incarnation of culture as education is the transmission of culture- there is no possible separation between these things- are you starting to track?
As a conservative there is little merit to cloud the public schools with the spectre of sectarian and religious sentiments. If preserving a Free Appropriate Public Education is “silly” than I’m more than happy to be as “silly” as possible in defense of this nation.
It seems to me that we had it right when we focussed on teaching our students about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Federalist Papers. Our civic religion is what has been weakened.
I agree. The Constitution was like our national creed that everyone, of all faiths or none, loved and honored. And the public school was where a child learned from an early age what makes us Americans: our Constitution. Community cohesion. National cohesion as Americans with a unique founding on the principles of self-government and fundamental inalienable liberties.
Among the stupidities committed by previous school administrations and blessed by school boards, the shortsighted decision to sell school property 40 years ago. During a brief period, enrollments dropped for about 5 years. My son, born 1977, was among that group of schoolchildren who were sometimes placed in combined classes (2nd and 3rd together) because enrollment had declined. But like the Stock Market, what goes down will eventually climb back up again. And in desirable South County, the inevitable happened, about 1990. Among the schools sold: beautiful Garfield Elementary School in Oak Park. It's now SBCC's Schott Center. My husband attended Garfield when it first opened in 1934, his grandmother a charter member of the PTA. Ken walked 1 block to school. Today's kids are transported to Adams School, across busy Las Positas. Postscript: Hope District did it right. During those years of dropped enrollment, the district rented Hope School to Montessori. Vieja Valley and Monte Vista (Eric's school) remained open. As the district prepared for the uptick, they took over Hope and fixed her up and voila! -- 3 fine schools serving all the district's families. Imagine if Hope had done as Santa Barbara and Goleta.
Thank you for pointing out the shining example of the Hope District, which re-opened its downtown elementary school. Hope district has no transportation costs.
Bonnie, thank you so much for drawing our attention to this vital group and movement- we must return schools to local neighborhoods to start to recover vital community and culture that is eroding year by year. We have lost so much that benefits our children by bussing and going to schools that are not in our neighborhoods- All of us should promote and support this movement for the betterment of Santa Barbara families and the well being of our wonderful city!!!
Steven, thank you for pointing out one of greatest benefits of neighborhood schools - sense of community.
Alice, there are many more things to name not to mention a return to the principle of subsidiarity- where what can be done competently ought to be done at the most local level- we have to return education and schools to local communities!!!
Bonnie Donovan for Mayor!!!
Growing up in the 1950's when attending public schools, parental involvement was a given.
There was no other support mechanism other than what parents were willing to provide through volunteer efforts on behalf of their own children. Parental engagement was a natural extension of our K-12 experience. Parents served as official liaisons through PTA organizations, volunteered to serve hot lunches, provide labor on work days to enhance school landscaping and repair playground equipment, help organize school bake sales, and chaperone school field trips.
Then after 1962 came the teachers unions. Alienation of public schools from the families they served became the new fact of life. Different times today, but one needs to recognize what we had at one time and what we lost when the teachers unions came to stand between parents and their children, during these important early years of public education.
Yes to no on teachers unions. In general, the idea of government employment, was service. Now it’s a lifetime of support. The notion that unions ought to be excluded from any government service jobs is tempting.
Thomas they really should, the teachers unions have a nefarious agenda!
Thank you for sharing about parents. One of the biggest benefits of neighborhood schools is increased parental participation because the school is close and accessible to home.
Exactly right! One of the many benefits!!!
Thank you for writing, Bonnie. J. Livingston, you don't mention what I believe drove a wedge into local schools: busing. The local schools were mandated to accept kids from totally different social/economic districts. This short sighted idea was the exact point, however. The result was the demise of the local school concept, which was working very well, except for poorer districts. The disadvantaged schools cried out because their kids didn't have the same resources the better districted schools had: busing was their answer; result? dumb everyone down to less than mediocre. The better schools had better teachers and parental funding (of course). I've thought that leaving the kids in their home districts made more sense (in case of emergencies, etc.) and family disruption. "Busing" the teachers would have been more a productive result. Lower income districts could offer better pay to entice the better trained teachers; I don't know how it would work exactly, but each bus cost thousands and drivers have pensions (add in the logistics folks) not really paying for education.
There are many ways to circumvent equalization of funding for public schools, and still deprive students of quality education. It is not alway about the money, but internal school policies, formal and informal, as well.
. The legendary case that got a trial court verdict in favor of the students was Vegara vs LAUSD which proved there is a "dance of the lemons" that disproportionately placed teachers on probation or low performance ratings primarily in the lower income neighborhood schools. Trial court agree this violated the US Constitution guarantee of equal protection.
The court set out multi-part reform measures that needed to be undertaken as a result of this trial's findings. Teachers union with Gov Brown's blessings, appealed and overturned those findings. And LAUSD went back to business as usual.
"I've thought that leaving the kids in their home districts made more sense (in case of emergencies, etc.) and family disruption." Yes.
Thank you, Michael, for pointing out one of the biggest benefits of neighborhood schools: parental convenience and involvement, vs family disruption.
Thank you also for pointing out safety and emergency preparedness as well.
Neighborhood schools are essential infrastructure for the community in addition to being an educational resource. Infrastructure for after school, for weekends, for emergencies. To not have a neighborhood school in one's own neighborhood where children (and residents without children as well) can play after school and on the weekend and where families can gather in the event of an emergency, that was a big loss to the essential infrastructure of Santa Barbara. Those school buildings made the city a better place to live for everyone.
Santa Barbara lost THREE pieces of essential infrastructure when the District sold its three downtown schools - Downtown Eastside (Lincoln), Downtown Westside (Wilson) & Downtown Oak Park/Cottage Hospital (Garfield). This disastrous decision has resulted in a loss of neighborhood cohesion 24/7, far beyond the loss of what happened there during the school day. We still have Garfield campus, owned by SB City College. We need to open its doors to the more than 500 students who live within walking distance of it currently and give it back to the neighborhood.
Santa Barbara also lost Jefferson School on the Riviera. Essential community-owned infrastructure.
It is also true that public schools were fully funded in the 1950s and 1960s. Bake sales were for extras. All sports transportation, campus maintenance, etc. were paid for by the district. During the 1950s and 1960s, all neighborhood school playgrounds were staffed by UCSB/SBCC students after school and on Saturdays so neighborhood kids had a place to go and play pick-up games of softball, etc. "Going up to the playground" was a common refrain back in the day as kids had a sense of place. Santa Barbara schools in the 1950s and 1960s were funded equivalent to the funding of Montecito schools today (adjusted for inflation). Of course, taxes were higher and Prop. 13 hadn't been enacted--never underestimate the power of actually having the funds to do the right thing by students AND taxpayers. Taxpayers all benefitted from fully funded schools because schools are public buildings. Taxpayers bought the land and built the buildings. Cutting back on available funding for maintaining those buildings has diminished their value and caused a huge backlog of maintenance so that more bond issues must be passed simply to keep up.
Haha Laura. Revenue is not the problem. Spending priorities are SBUSD’s problem. Properties could be maintained if money not wasted on District level Administrators and social programs. You work for SBUSD. You ought to know.
Wow...presume much? I do not work for SBUSD. I am a native Santa Barbarian who went to Roosevelt, SBJH, and SBHS. I graduated during the golden age of local public schools and fully funded public education. Back in those days (1960s) the district maintained schools very well. I agree that SBUSD has way too many highly compensated administrators.
Important dates in California K-12 education: for those with fond memories from their own 1950's-1960's California public education.
---1975: Rodda Act - Eduction Employment Relations Act - teachers unions formalized at the state level
---1978: Prop 13 in response to school boards sending property owners open-ended bills that supported teacher union collective bargaining demands
---1982: Free K-12 mandated by SCOTUS, regardless of legal resident status.
---1988: Prop 98 mandated 50% of all state general funds automatically allocated to K-14 public education
---Present: California K-12 continues to rank in the bottom 5% nationwide in student outcomes.
NB: 1970's Women's Liberation materially impacted the primarily female K-12 teaching profession. Open Borders movement also fully underway.
I think you are giving teachers unions a bad rap. What EXACTLY is wrong with paying teachers well? And it was actually the Civil Rights movement that gave both blacks and women the right to apply for any job for which they were qualified. (And why shouldn't women want to be lawyers, scientists, business executives?) Yes, many of my teachers in the 1950s were women (who had fewer options) but many were also men who were able to support their families on a single salary. Teachers pay was more in line with the economy at that time. Prop 13 put a stop to that...and that has been a huge problem. After all, Prop 13 also froze the property tax rates for corporations ---- Edison, So Cal Gas, Northrup Grumman, commercial properties all over the state, etc. Those entities never actually "sell" their property and thus those properties never get reappraised at market value. It is (once again) about the top 1%!
Top 1% in this state already pays 40% of all state taxes, and are moving out of the state as a result. Undermining Prop 13 by demanding a split roll taxation formula additionally will have unforeseen consequences.
Do you still think Calif #45 standing is all about money? Which makes it hard to explain Mississippi's recent dramatic rise student success outcomes, apparently just by making phonics their required state reading formula.
State by state K-12 funding data for "base amount" per student; not the total amount as there are other sources of funding, bond issues and parcel tax funding as well.
California K-12 base amount funding is among the top nationwide.
https://reports.ecs.org/comparisons/k-12-funding-2024-02
Prop 98 was intended to cure the Prop 13 perceived public education funding deficiencies, with the Prop 98 50% share of all general funds going automatically to K-12. Plus the equalizing of K-12 funding throughout the states so there are no more "rich districts and poor districts".
How much more of the state budget besides this automatic 50% should schools get today? How much in fact do they get. And what part of state government should gives up their current share? With property owners in addition still funding school capital improvement projects through bond issues and additional free flow funding for schools by passing parcel taxes, the total funding going to public eduction well exceeds just the Prop 98 allocation.
What exactly was the classroom improvement outcomes when Gov Brown allocated even more bonus funding, under his local control funding plan (LCFF) to under-performing California schools? Did any school show improvements related to those extra funds? What were the best practices this extra funding demonstrated.
It is no longer just an issue about money. But something else. Let's hope the teaching profession will lead the way to better classroom outcomes. And that voters finally break away from responding only to teacher union election endorsements. That realtionship has become a school for failure in this state.
It is also always tricky making full compensation package comparisons for the teaching 9 -month 'working year" compared to other occupation's more standard 12 month working year.
As an aside, this prop 98 formula seems problematic. It mandates 50% of the general fund goes to education. But what if there are fewer students, or more students. As this number changes, the 50% of tax fund stays the same. It is a poor mechanism that cannot adjust to demographics. Likely put in by the teachers unions lobby as a guarantee for busloads of funding. Just a guess here.
I have no problem with smaller classrooms and more per pupil funding, which can translate as higher pay, if that is the way Prop 98 works during periods declining enrollments. Hell to pay though when student populations go up and their sharing of Prop 98 automatic funding creates "pay cuts". What is egregious however in this whole automatic education funding stream, is there are no student outcome accountability standards to get any of this money.
Plus the education unions go apoplectic when there is a decline in general fund revenues -- what happened to their "fair share"? They only like this when the general fund revenues go up, and take no responsibility for creating the poor business climate and legislative micromanaging in this state, that is now seeing state revenues go down.
Those that chose to work for taxpayer-supported institutions need to invest in the overall health of the state economy, instead of spending 13 years teaching their students to hate America and hate capitalism. And see ever increasing taxation on someone else as the sole answer to all their own self-imposed ills.
Thanks for the information and updates.
I am sorry for the students of today who miss out on either walking to school with their friends, or standing together waiting for the school bus (without the helicopter parents/guardians hovering over them). Also, in my neighborhood, there are many school age kids, but you would never know it because after school is over, they hustle into their homes never to been seen again. When I grew up in Santa Barbara during the late 1940s, after Peabody school let out, we were never to be seen at home until dark, when my parents rang a large metal triangle, which was loud enough to be heard far away. Thinking of the games we played, the togetherness so sadly missing today. KIds, stop playing with your phones and computers - get outside and play baseball and jacks and marbles again! And read comics after jumping rope and hopscotching.
Thank you Carol!!!
So true
Neighborhood schools are so important. Thanks for the trip down memory lane. The Coalition for Neighborhood Schools knows that those days can be recreated. Coalitionforneighborhoodschools.com
Thank you, Carol, for sharing your own personal neighborhood school story. Thank you for sharing the fitness benefits and the “togetherness” benefits which come from going to school in your own neighborhood with the kids who live in your neighborhood. My definition of a neighborhood school is “walking home after school to your friend’s house to play (or to the Boys and Girls Club ) ! “ Kids today are driven everywhere! Private school, charter schools, magnet schools, homeschooling. And that’s great, but at CNS we believe the neighborhood school is the best alternative for the vast majority of children. Most parents just want a good public school in their neighborhood. If we give that back to parents and establish a neighborhood school concept in Santa Barbara, I believe much of that neighborhood play and “togetherness” can be regained - even if it’s indoors at the friend’s house or backyard rather than free roaming the streets like we used to do. Thanks for your wonderful comment.
So I quote
If the city genuinely aims to create a 15-minute city, one must question….
Why is no one questioning about the city becoming a 15 minute city?
That means no cars.. parking etc ..
FREEDOM to move about beyond 15 minutes..
What the heck?
We wrote about it before; that is the whole plan with building housing downtown. :(
And we the people are in alignment with this plan for bogus climate agenda ?
No to the green agenda. But walkable local schools have long played a role in just plain Americana. I even walked a mile on my own to our local kindergarten. I still remember my mother showing me the route and introducing me to neighbors along the way, in case I ever needed help. Then later a K-6 school was built closer by, then a walkable Jr High and walkable HS. As our SF-Bay Area community itself sprawled out post WWII, they did add school busses later.
J. Livingston, thank you for pointing out that neighborhood schools are as American as Mom and Apple Pie! Americana - yes!
Well hasn’t it always been this way.. I would walk home every day from SBJH n SBHS to our home on Charlotte Lane (passed the old mission) but I would cut through Rocky Nook Park.. with the exception of when I went to Marymount .. those roads are pretty tight but have walked them as well..
Wouldn’t the solution be to simply stop bussing children to other districts .. ?
Jenn, thank you for pointing out the biggest benefit of neighborhood schools - walking to school !!!
Thank you too
Ugh
Jenn--That is a serious walk (all up hill!). The SB district isn't bussing to other districts but it is bussing students from downtown (where there is no district elementary school) all the way up to the Mesa elementary schools! Hard on the kids and hard for parents to participate in PTA, etc.
Ok got it
Thank you
J. Livingston...you have described my childhood and school-going experience as well. I love that your mother showed you the route (as did mine) and I walked to school from Kindergarten on with my neighborhood pals. And, yes, we know folks along the way---who often were in their yard to say hello! I so want that for the downtown kids in Santa Barbara.
So on the one hand the kids are being subjected to the WOKE propaganda and on the other they’re victims of proselytising.
Right now, the United States is under attack from something called “The Seven Mountain Mandate, which originated in the 1970s and seeks to transform society into a “Christian” one by controlling seven key factors of life: family, religion, media, education, government, business, and arts/entertainment. They typically back Trump, which is why we see so many bizarre analogies of Trump to Christ (heresy the MAGAs lap up). In 2012, journalist Katherine Stewart published The Good News Club: The Christian Right’s Stealth Assault on America’s Children, describing the local controversy that erupted when Good News Club came to Seattle's Loyal Heights Elementary School and chronicling what she learned as an undercover reporter at CEF's triennial National Convention in 2010. Separately, Stewart has reported on complaints by parents of children of other faiths being warned, by their Good News Club classmates, that they may go to hell,[27] and of Good News Club's teaching, as an object lesson on obedience, of I Samuel 15:3's divine imperative to "attack the Amalekites" and "put to death men and women, children and infants."[28] Stewart clarifies the fundamentalist and Christian nationalist nature of CEF and the Good News Club. She emphasizes that "religious fundamentalists want to be in the public schools because they want to "take back" the public schools and repurpose them with a fundamentalist Christian agenda.
➡️Young children cannot distinguish between an activity that takes place in their public school and one that is endorsed by their public school.
Again, bringing Christianity onto school campuses is problematic and stupid, but the people behind it know damn well what they’re doing: confusing children.
Let me cite journalist Katherine Stewart:
“…Young children cannot distinguish between an activity that takes place in their public school and one that is endorsed by their public school. They think if something happens in the school, it must have the stamp of state authority, it must be what the school wants them to believe, it must be what they should believe.... That's why these Good News Clubs ... are so intent on getting their programs in the public schools."
I read up on this good news club and… to join the club, parents must sign and enroll their student. So it’s not exactly forced on or exposed to all students.
It is a 1st amendment issue of free speech and freedom of religion, (not freedom from religion). We’ll see how much enthusiasm parents have when for instance, a Muslim group wants to start an
‘Allah Afterschool’ program.
What's wrong with having a Muslim group, if they have an evangelical group at school? Are you Islamophobic?
It’s clear that it’s designed to confuse children into think Christianity is State-sanctioned through the public schools. Developmentally and psychologically, a child exposed to this proselytizing won’t be able to separate church and state.
The point being that in America, Christians may expect to be allowed a voluntary afterschool club. But what if… A satanic club wants to open up an afterschool program? Students for Satan. What if. Because that is a known religion and if one religion gets in so must others be allowed in.
The clubs are voluntary, with parents agreement. And there are already gay clubs, bi clubs, trans clubs, why not a satan club? The reason is a moral one. Because few parents would find students for satan acceptable, and few would sign their kids up to such a club.
But what they did? What if a Muslim club started up pushing the whole Gaza episode, and blaming other religious groups for mass violence in Gaza? And threatening violence to those other groups. What then?
Is the school supposed to decide which religions are allowed afterschool privileges? Based on what criteria?
Because if they do decide to exclude some while allowing others, there will be religious freedom 1st amendment federal lawsuits by the excluded religious group.
The answer is somewhere in the public property and public purpose that schools are built on. And the idea that public schools are meant to serve, to educate, to bring up new citizens with knowledge, wisdom and morals.
And after school, that public property may continue to serve that public which owns the facility for the public’s benefit.
The first amendment guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion, and this often overlooked distinction means that the government shall remain neutral to religion. Neither promoting nor hindering religion. And, that government must allow all to believe in whatever religion they want to believe in. However abhorrent.
Excluding all religions from a public school site, in an afterschool setting has been determined by SCOTUS for instance, as placing an undue government pressure against religion, violating the 1st amendment.
And so that translates to allowing after school, religious clubs, after school economic clubs, after school philosophy clubs.
Maybe excluding after school sex clubs would be seen as wise.. Because our morals even today would not allow prurient clubs for pre teens and teens.
So the final constitutional analysis is that all religious clubs must be allowed to use afterschool public facilities, or none shall be allowed. And our current courts and the nation in general are on the OK for religious use of school facilities side of things.
Would a satan club have any chance? Constitutionally yes, but locally maybe no. Most parents would rise up and vote out school officials that allowed such a club. Although maybe in Portland… Because schools are still part of our local communities, parents and taxpayers have some vestigial say in school matters. Even though Sacramento is ever gathering more power over local school decisions, parents can still vote locally to remove school board members with wildly abhorrent anti pedagogical views. Because when it comes to parents, most are protective of their children, and expect some degree of morality from their schools.
And pointing out here that morality, in today’s secular world, however weak, is a leftover echo from our religious heritage. And that schools used to be the very place parents expected morals to be taught, studied and observed. Now, with today’s secular schools where does morality come from?
The Humanists would have children learn from DEI programs, which in themselves are a ‘new’ religion, adopted with evangelical fervor and thrust upon young children by teachers during school hours as dogmatic curriculum.
And so the moralities impressed upon yesterday’s students, have now been replaced by humanism, socialism, DEI, CRT. It seems tame and quaint that a few Christians wish to offer afterschool lessens in old time morality to willing and interested students.
Speaking of “problematic and stupid” McGrune, your characterization of the Good News Club is yet another example of the woke agenda and misinformation in our schools.
The last school board meeting I attended at SBUSD, was an embarrassing attempt by our elected school board members in silencing parents from exercising their constitutional right of free speech. Were you there?
No, the threat to our schools is not the activity of a voluntary school club spreading the word of peace, love and Christ. The real threat to our schools is the indoctrination of our children by a variety of influences promoted by the woke, liberal establishment, in lock step with the Democratic Party.
Sure, the queer agenda, climate activism and hysteria, racial animus directed at whites, destain for anything Christian or Jewish and anti American propaganda are just a sample of what our children are subjected to, all endorsed and promoted by the Teachers Union. The good news? Parents and taxpayers are not remaining silent anymore.
Do you know what’s even better that the Good News Club? Parents privately taking their kids to an off site church of their choosing. What this organization is doing is trying to deliberately confuse kids into thinking The State of California endorses Christianity. 😂
BTW, California was FOUNDED on Christianity, specifically Catholicism. Should students be taught that, or should it be hidden for fear of “confusing “ them?
It was founded on The Doctrine of Discovery, in which the Catholic Church gave itself permission to obliterate the indigenous peoples and steal all they had. We need to stop the further colonization of this land.
Truly clueless!
Ya sure McGrune, let’s give it all back to the Chumash, they can always use the money. “Stop the further colonization of this land?”
Do you actually believe this garbage?
Did I ever say “give it back to the Chumash” or did I point out that the origins of the State were, in fact, based on a history of religious and financial motivation?
Are you upset by all the land Israel stole and their genocide?
“Free Palestine,” wasn’t that just used in a horrific murder of two innocent young people?
Beyond upset. It’s the ugliest thing I’ve seen in a long time and it’s killing the US too because we are part and parcel in making it happen.
The threat to our schools is the data collection and unpaid child labor at the behest of corporations & laws that remove local control in favor of planned economies through things like the Every Student Succeeds Act and the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. Removal of local control and data collection (as information as sensitive as children’s attitudes, values, beliefs and behaviors) is thrusting our society into a dystopia where kids are nothing more than a global workforce in a dystopian gig economy.
We agree on all that.
Alice Linahan in perhaps the most knowledgeable person on the subject of returning education to local populations and ridding it of globalist ideology and vicious data collection.
Right now in Texas the Republican led government is globalizing and destroying schools unlike any other time in history. True conservatives are aligned with some on the “left” in some of their arguments against what’s happening, but the key is bipartisan consensus and solutions for this, because the well being of children, parents and teachers is of utmost concern. We all have the same best interests at heart, despite it all.
Teachers don’t “get it” and have been taught themselves incorrectly, not aware of the dangers of things like SEL (social emotional learning). The public doesn’t seem to give a damn because the life of a child is cheap (eg they’re not taxpayers or voters).
What’s needed is an appeal to all sides for reform against the predatory technology as well as the woke crap.
https://open.substack.com/pub/alicelinahan/p/the-lie-of-accountability-how-education?r=5h77nu&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/alicelinahan/p/bill-gates-and-the-hijacking-of-texas?r=5h77nu&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/alicelinahan/p/how-government-controlled-school?r=5h77nu&utm_medium=ios
What’s going on with Texas.
Oh boy, it’s a long and disquieting story, but Texas Republicans are leading the way with the globalization of education with their ESAs/vouchers “school choice” legislation… keep in mind we already have school choice, what they’re doing is making all areas of education tied to the federal government, with all its surveillance and data collection—- that means previously independent schools and homeschools will be subject to the very things they have been trying to escape. Instead of fixing public schools they’re usurping all kinds of education at the expense of taxpayers… and… they’re using UNESCO Open Education Resources (blockchain)! That means curriculum can be modified whenever, which parents can’t see… there are some conservatives that have been opposed to this but their spineless representatives ignore them. Alice Linahan and Lynn Davenport, two true champions of this nation (who are also conservative Republicans) have been pointing out what’s happening. They are the best people in this nation… once the globalists get ahold of Texas education they can destroy so many other parts of it in other states… Texas educates 10% of the nations kids, plus they have a lot of water…
https://open.substack.com/pub/alicelinahan/p/from-huxley-to-turchenko-to-tucker?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
When you give something—especially in the name of help—you should ask: does this act have long-term, harmful consequences? That same question must be asked of Senate Bill 2, now passed and signed into law. SB 2 is being sold as a win for parental rights, but in reality, it establishes the infrastructure for universal, government-regulated “school choice” in Texas—an Orwellian system of centralized data collection, ideological compliance, and behavioral monitoring. This is not liberty—this is submission by design. And the path was paved by Democrats, but is now being executed with precision by Republicans.
But, let’s dig deeper.
This is No Longer About Education—This Is a Global Psychological Operation
The Texas Legislature has become ground zero for a sweeping and coordinated assault on American sovereignty, parental rights, and childhood innocence. At the center of this assault? Your child’s school.
And behind the curtain? Globalists and Islamists, two distinct forces with different theologies—but the same strategic goal: Hijack the education system to track, modify, and control the values, beliefs, and behaviors of American children. Through school choice legislation, social-emotional learning, federal compliance metrics, and behavioral surveillance, both factions are seizing soft power over the soul of this nation. Texas is not resisting—it’s leading the charge. SB 2: The Trojan Horse for Universal State-Controlled Education
Marketed as a win for parents, Texas Senate Bill 2 creates Education Savings Accounts (ESAs) regulated by the Texas Comptroller and ultimately the Texas Education Agency (TEA). Participation requires compliance with federal College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR) metrics—tied directly to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA).
This is not educational freedom. It’s digital compliance disguised as choice.
Under SB 2, even homeschoolers and private school students are tracked, evaluated, and eventually regulated. The TEA—run by unelected Commissioner Mike Morath—controls the statewide longitudinal data based system put in place through federal dollars. You just get to pick your prison cell.
I want to copy this and send to all. Nailed it.
Mcgrune- you don’t know what you are talking about! It is not a choice of whether or not there is religion in the schools it is a choice of which religion, yours is clearly secular humanism, which is the most destructive religion in history- it has even destroyed your common sense!
There is no reason to use a public school for religious education other than to conflate the two. There are dozens of even better facilities the good news club can utilise. I’m a conservative.
You do have a few points that sound conservative- but you are in fact an ideologue- which means you make an idol out of your own ideas- it appears as if you can’t distinguish between fact and ideological talking point- it at least you are in the conversation-
In a lot of ways I’m more conservative than anyone I know, but I’m an original thinker who gets pummeled when they dare suggest kids can be taught Christianity in Churches and the academics at public schools, separately so that the both have the opportunity to thrive.
You should not get pummeled unless you say something silly, and here you are saying something silly, not at all original- here is a truth for you- there is no such thing as culture or education that is separate from religion- it is impossible because religion is an aspect of human life and religion is the incarnation of culture as education is the transmission of culture- there is no possible separation between these things- are you starting to track?
As a conservative there is little merit to cloud the public schools with the spectre of sectarian and religious sentiments. If preserving a Free Appropriate Public Education is “silly” than I’m more than happy to be as “silly” as possible in defense of this nation.
It seems to me that we had it right when we focussed on teaching our students about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Federalist Papers. Our civic religion is what has been weakened.
I agree. The Constitution was like our national creed that everyone, of all faiths or none, loved and honored. And the public school was where a child learned from an early age what makes us Americans: our Constitution. Community cohesion. National cohesion as Americans with a unique founding on the principles of self-government and fundamental inalienable liberties.
I read this article by Ms. FOIA Bonny Donovan titled "The Coalition for Neighborhood Schools"
with Ms. Donovan's KEY statement at the very end of the article shown below under UPDATES>
"I just received a response to my Public Records request from the County… Now for my IT guy to open it for me."
"We still haven't located Joe Holland." And you will not find him.
I have a new title "Hillary's SB So-Called-Leaders Body Count"
As I have been saying SB is The Sex Abuse Capitol of California
Maybe it has to do with all the Cover-Up-ed Sexual Abuse Cases in SB??
https://www.noozhawk.com/4-felony-charges-filed-against-tennis-coach-in-decades-old-molestation-case/
Howard Walther, Member of a Military Family