Vista Watchdog wrote on Apr 23, 2008 5:38 AM:Granted, laying off hardworking people is a hard decision, but history shows the hardest decisions are often the best decisions. To that end one must now seriously consider bringing the Dual Magnet High Schools to a close: Shut it down and look for other ways to resolve your overcrowding at the two High Schools you already have. Pouring more money into a failed project always results in getting less for more. In the end nobody will be happy and you wil find that even more money will be needed over the life of this school, due to all the "corner cutting" and "bad blood" throughout the project. Get over with, admit your mistakes, and shut it down. We can effectivley expand our current schools to accomodate the children, and do it without any serious impact to the class schedules. I've seen the plans, so I know they exist. Put Expansion back on the table and solve our children's facilities problems this summer!

Observer wrote on Apr 23, 2008 9:41 AM:Watchdog has it right. It will always be a "money pit". The cuts for construction will come back to cost the district. At least now one prominent member of the board knows there is a DIFFERENCE in building on a level Lincoln site as against a hillside!

Parent Employee wrote on Apr 23, 2008 9:46 AM:Can someone please explain to me how California has the EIGHTH largest economy in the world - yet we can't fund our schools?

Beat the Drum wrote on Apr 23, 2008 10:07 AM:Look, it is hard for some Trustees to admit, but it is time to cut the loss of the Dual Magnet High School. Maybe they are afraid to admit that they were wrong in deciding to put it at the edge of town where it doesn't serve the children who truly need it. Gibson and Guffanti have offered other alternative sites, such as Lincoln (it is already owned by VUSD and the cost to build actual stick buildings would be more cost effective) but the Board Majority continually shot that idea down because they had to have a "new" school. If they would have had staff look at the cost and to see if there were matching funds two years ago when it was proposed, we would have the Dual Magnet up and running and this discussion would be moot. Now we have to do clean up and the Board Majority feels compelled to build a trailer park school that can be quietly dismantled when it is proven that it is too late to build it because by the time it is built there won't be enough enrollment to support having it.

sixities chick wrote on Apr 23, 2008 10:16 AM:To help save some jobs in the VUSD the administrators could take a 10% pay cut. Joyce Bales' salary is higher than the State Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Governor!

Not Enough wrote on Apr 23, 2008 10:55 AM:More administrative cuts are needed. I also like the idea of a 10% across the board cut for ALL VUSD administration and back office support staff.

Did He Really Say That wrote on Apr 23, 2008 12:22 PM:Is it true that at the board meeting Dr. Guffanti blamed teacher raises for the district's budget problems? The same teachers who have received 0% raises in 5 of the last 7 years in spite of hefty COLA increases from the state?

TaxPayer wrote on Apr 23, 2008 12:35 PM:Save our jobs. Ask the VTA president to pay her own way. She now gets paid by the school district and yet does not work as a teacher. The teachers' union needs to pay for her. They have the money.

Working Fanily wrote on Apr 23, 2008 1:16 PM:It is time that our own VTA president pay her own way. She works fulltime for the teachers union but the school district pays her salary. She needs to gives back to the school district what she takes. The Vista Teachers pay dues and she works fultime for them, she needs to give back her VUSD salary so that others can keep their jobs.

VUSD employee wrote on Apr 23, 2008 1:24 PM:Teachers union president needs to pay her own way! She works for the teachers' union they should pay her salary not the school district. Save the jobs pay your own way.

Observer wrote on Apr 23, 2008 7:40 PM:Did he say has it entirely wrong. I remember that the teachers as for and received a raise withing the past 2 years. Their raises took money intended to be used for a program at Mission Meadows upon an order to do so from A Board Member. That's why a year later the principal moved to another district.

VISTA WTFDOG wrote on Apr 23, 2008 8:26 PM:"...history shows the hardest decisions are often the best decisions." Dude, what the heck are you talking about?

History wrote on Apr 23, 2008 9:12 PM:NC Times (4 January 2007)
County education officials review plan for VUSD raises

"In November, the district sent the San Diego County Office of Education a letter detailing Vista Unified's plan for funding the new contracts, which includes increased salaries and heath benefits expected to cost the district an additional $7.5 million annually."

Please note the current Budget shortfall is about $8M. Looks like "Did He Really Say That" failed History and is attempting to use Propaganda!

Hey History... wrote on Apr 23, 2008 10:49 PM:Since you seem to have such great recall yourself, do you remember the obscenely high (over 15%) raises that were given to nearly all district office administrators in recent history? Then quite a few of those administrators retired with pensions nicely inflated by those raises. Seems pretty unethical to me....especially since teachers got about 2% in salary increases after many years of 0%, despite the district receiving COLA from the State. But it's so easy to bash those greedy teachers. After all, they're getting rich off the district, right? Oh wait....that's the superintendant. And by the way "Working Family" and "VUSD Employee," the VTA president's salary BY CONTRACT is only partially paid for by the District. The other portion is paid for by the VTA.

Did He Really Say That wrote on Apr 24, 2008 5:32 AM:Dear History - While you quote an article and accuse me of failing history, you do not refute what I stated. That is because the facts I stated are correct. Hmmm, propaganda?

Pinocchio wrote on Apr 24, 2008 6:59 AM:History I tend to believe you $ 7.5M sounds about right what about the under funded pension fund for these teachers? That costs 9M per year, VUSD was supposed to come up with a plan to fund these mistakes or get rid of them. So what was the plan? To cut direct student services and say that special education students don’t need these services anyway.

They must think we are really stupid and hope that we are as functioning illiterate as VUSD’s student population.

The VTA has been spinning for so long that they cannot tell the difference between the truth and a lie.

Wait a minute we just have to assume they are all lies and no truth.

Can we really trust them with our kids?

History wrote on Apr 24, 2008 6:46 PM:I believe that showing your statement regarding "0% raises in 5 of the last 7 years" to be a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts was enough to both refute your claims on raises and show your attempt to propagandize. However, primarily I was just showing everyone where the Trustee may have come up with his conclusion. The numbers seem too close to be an accident, especially when you consider that the County Office of Ed. was questioning the reasoning of the District at the time of the raises, and specifically noted the declining enrollment as well as some reference to the real estate bubble bursting along with the looming economic down turn. All in all I'd say VUSD had "Fair Warning" that bad times where near, yet chose to grant these raises anyway.

That said, if it had not been for an administrative error (or was it a strategic error) teachers would have been cut as opposed to placing the entire burden on the backs of the classified employees (who have received less pay raises than the teachers).

History wrote on Apr 24, 2008 6:59 PM:The Sr. Administrators raises equated to only about $0.5M annually, so I guess we could say they filled the gap between the raises mention earlier and the current cuts. Of course, I have no great love for any of those Administrators who manipulated those big raises, then retired or left for greener pastures. Especially after having left VUSD in such dire straits! It will take some serious belt tightening on ALL levels if we are to get through the rough times ahead. And that will take new Leadership on the Board. The current Majority is responsible for the mess we are in, and yes History shows us that the Minority has been right for quite some time. In Fact, I clearly recall one Board member stating back before the Bond Passed that we soul not continue to see the large increases in enrollment, and in fact were to soon see declining enrollments. He was not only ignored, but impugned for being out of touch. He also said we would not need all the schools listed on the Bond, and as we have cancelled the two K-8 schools, actually closed Lincoln (Rancho Minerva was to be our 5th Middle School, and there was never any mention of closing Lincoln, in fact there were specific funds in the bond to renovate Lincoln. Some of the first dollars spent!). Again, it looks like he was far more in touch with reality than many give him credit. Yes, there were other ways to resolve out overcrowding, but certain Sr. Administrators and Board Members were dead set on a Massive Building project, and never considered any of the financially sound alternatives that would have enabled our students to have already been in smaller classes, and for our current Budget to be well positioned for this current economic down turn.

Ted wrote on Apr 24, 2008 8:49 PM:"If you equate my salary with that, it's about a dollar on the nickel return," Sinn said.
So, that's $150,000 per year (if his math is correct). This is the guy whose responsibility was to come up with a logo for VUSD, correct?
Did NCTimes find out if he actually writes grants, or just review them?
A crony of Bales from Colorado, correct?
Money wisely spent? I don't think so.
Someday, the whole story is going to come out about VUSD. This is only a footnote to a story of one seriously morally bankrupt school administration.

To Ted wrote on Apr 25, 2008 5:29 AM:He has written a few and reviews them as well. The funds spoken of in this article are as a result of Grants that he wrote. Please note, most of those written by teachers are very small dollars: enough for their classroom only. The district Grant Writer applies for large grants that are to aid the whole District. Have you ever secured $3M for anything (without having to tax the local citizens to death with a Bond)?

Shame on Sinn wrote on Apr 25, 2008 11:42 AM:Anyone who claims they do something completely alone in a school district is shameful. Sinn did not secure that grant by himself. He simply does not have the knowledge of VUSD to justify any grant opportunity. Who was his team? How about including their salaries in the mix. How many years was this grant worked on? Did it start before he got here and he is just taking the credit now? He should have been one of the cuts but is protected by Joyce Bales as a Colorado insider... The Truth will eventully be told and Joyce Bales and her Colorado team will be asked to leave. Not soon enough for her to collect her second retirement check from VUSD....

confused wrote on Apr 25, 2008 1:20 PM:I am sort of confused. This grant writer gets a grant to develop, start, operate a preschool program in the district. Isn't this money earmarked for just that purpose? How is this going to help solve the budjet shortfall that is supposedly coming? Is this a program that was going to have to be instituted without that 3 million grant or is it being instituted because of the 3 million dollar grant? As a parent of a preschooler and a taxpayer, I hope that the money that was asked for in the grant isn't going to pay for something other than what it was requested for.

To Confused wrote on Apr 25, 2008 6:53 PM:Typically grants of this sort are to aid in operating a program already in place, or to aid in getting the program started. Grant writers don't only write grants, but also search for those that will fit with the district's current programs and goals. I note that "Shame on Sinn" attemtps to claim he could not have done this alone. But, a good gratn writer actually does do a great deal of work by themselves. This is not to say they dont' work with others. However, here too a good grant writer will significantly improve the chances of these others in obtaining grants. Often teachers are too busy doing what teacher should be doing, TEACHING, to spend much time researching and writing grants. True, some happen into a grant or two, and spend significant hours of their own writing the grant. But, when more than half the grants they apply for don't get funded, they will loose interest in putting in the time and effort required to get these funds. So, having a good grat writer on staff can aid significatnly in obtaining the many smaller grants that help day to day in the classroom. But, teachers need to feed their interesets in specific grants or areas of study to the Grant wrtier for them to know what to go after. So, if Sinn is not getting these inputs fromt he teachers it is the teachers who are failing to take advantage of the resource they have available. If you want to see if this guy is really worth his salt, then you need to inundate him with every grant opportunity you even think you might be interested in. Then see if he can handle the workload, and bring in the bacon!

Questions wrote on Apr 26, 2008 7:58 AM:With all the budget cuts at what appears to be the start of a recession, where will VUSD get the funds to hire all the new teachers and administrators required to operate the dual magnet high schools? We are certain to see more budget cuts in coming years as we continue to see housing prices plummet, gas prices soar, food prices climb, un-employment rise, and revenues coming into the state's coffers drop. So, with California leading the current economic decline in the US, leaving more fertile employment grounds in other states, young families will be inclined to leave California to find work. This will most likely evolve those who rent before it involves those who own, except for those whose houses are in distress. But, we can certainly expect a decline in young families to accompany this recession. So, with this decline of young families to provide the children attending school, why will we even need these new schools anyway?

Observer wrote on Apr 26, 2008 4:03 PM:Questions hit the nail on the head. When 3 to 5 humdred students relieve the overcrowding, the problem is not as great as some on the board indicate. With some sensible planning even the present load of students could be intelligently managed such as breaking lunch periods into 2 or 3 periods. This has been suggested but the "must haves" nixed it at the get go.

Samuel to Shame on Shinn wrote on Apr 26, 2008 9:26 PM:You and your 4 or 5 other VTA members that continue to misrepresent the facts are making fools of yourselves. How does Dr. Bales protect someone when she has no vote? I believe that the Board voted 5-0 not to cut this position. I think that it was Mr. Hubbard that made the definitive comment that he was not going to vote to eliminate a position when the person was paying his way. Also, he has only been on the job less than a year. Let’s give him a chance. And, what is wrong if Dr. Bales brings in people that has worked for her in the past? Let’s use a sports analogy. If an owner has to make a managerial change does it make any sense to force the new manager to retain the assistants that were part of the problem? Of course not! Come on folks; let’s think these things through before trying to create a controversy when none is there. Your fellow taxpayers are smarter than you give them credit for.

To observer wrote on Apr 26, 2008 9:52 PM:Both VHS and RBVHS could replace some of their existing buildings with modular 2-story buildings, as done just north of here at San Clemente High School. These modular 2-story buildings can be constructed in about 3 months time, especially if they are simply being placed on a pad currently supporting a single story building. They come complete with elevators, bathrooms, A/C, and Internet wiring. If put in at VHS all the portables on the parking lot could be removed, allowing more parking spaces. Additional Bathrooms would be added, eliminating the overcrowding in that arena. And additional Classrooms could be added to allow for smaller class sizes. Stagger your lunch periods, as done when I went to High School, and your problem is solved. Then there is the idea of going to 9 periods per day... That too worked when I went to High School back in the 70's, and we had over 5000 students at my school that was originally built for 3000. We didn't feel crowded, and we also fielded some awesome sports teams, as we had so many students from which to choose!

E.A.D. wrote on Apr 27, 2008 10:19 PM:I FIGURE JUST LAYOFF ONE GROUNDS PERSON,ONE WITH TENURE SHOULD SOLVE THE WHOLE PROBLEM!

To E.A.D. wrote on Apr 28, 2008 8:41 PM:Why not return to the days of old where it was the Teachers who took care of the schools, with the help of the local community. Then we would not need the Groundskeepers, or the Unions who prevent the teachers from doing the jobs teachers used to do. Of course, that would free up the current groundkeepers to open up companies doing landscape work and groundsckeeping for local businesses and homeowners (Jobs Americans won't do?).

To Sammy wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:49 PM:Sammy, Sammy, Sammy, why are you so upset at the facts of the situation? Accept them for the truth that they are. Mr. Sinn was not instrumental in the preschool grant, in fact the application for the preschool (EDD) started months before he arrived at VUSD. It is also common knowledge by those that attend school board meetings that Dr. Bales wanted a "public relations" position for VUSD. Greg Sinn was her public relations officer in Pueblo. Mr. Gibson did not want a public relations position for VUSD and stated that publically at a school board meeting so Dr. Bales re-packaged it as a "grant writer" and hired Sinn. By the way, at over $120,000 annual salary I believe he is way overpaid and is not "paying his way". Were there any other grants "written" by him other than the "preschool" one he is taking credit for? (SHAME ON SINN) I also find it interesting that he is one of five cabinet members that report directly to the superintendent. A rather high position for a "grant writer". But then I don't want "to create a controversy when none is there". By the way, what about the other positions (Classified) that have only been there less than a year and are getting cut. How about giving them a chance too... (Oh, that's right they have no history with Dr. Bales in Pueblo.) One closing note.. I am not a VTA member I am a taxpayer and a bit smarter than you give credit for....Can you say the same about not being a school board member?

Vista Watchdog wrote on Apr 30, 2008 9:45 PM:Reply to "To Sammy"

No, you are not a VTA member, but you are very close to many of them and beholden to them as well. As for the level of intellect... well there are those who would question anyone who has spent the last 10+ years supporting those who have been running this district into the ground at the expense of the children, all the while claiming the 2-person minority is at fault for all the many failures at VUSD. Of course, maybe you are smarter than the rest of us taxpayers and thus you can explain why a Magnet High School is being built so far from the majority of the potential students who it is entended to serve. And, maybe you can explain just how these students will get to this school when there are no busses (school or city) to transport them there, and when gasoline is pushing past $4/gal causing any parent to give serious consideration before driving all the way across town when their child could simply walk or ride a bike to the local high school. And maybe, just maybe you can explain how two people on a board of 5 can prevent the 3-person majority from getting things done. You have claimed to be "a bit smarter than (we) give (you) credit for." Are you game? By the way, Samuel is NOT a Board Member and I can attest to that!

Hit a Nerve wrote on May 1, 2008 1:57 PM:Vista Bow Wow... Hit a nerve? To close to the truth? How much did Dr. G cost the taxpayers in his legal roadblocks to the magnet school? Seems to me that there was a public vote put on the ballot and the majority of taxpayers voted for the construction of the high school years ago. Why has the "minority two" been so against the public's wishes? What about the stawberry hill site that was excellent at only $4 million dollars? Not good enough for the two minority board members. Now the current site costs taxpayers $17 million. Because of the current school board it's a wonder if the dual magnet high school will ever be built now yet the need is there. Oh well, elections are this fall and the public will decide if Sammy and Bow Wow are correct of if there is a need for a clean up. By the way, no rebuttal on the Greg Sinn position? PS: Enjoy the drama...

Vista Watchdog wrote on May 1, 2008 6:26 PM:Here we go again on Strawberry Hill. How many times do we have to cover the same old story: Hazardous chemicals used at Strawberry Hill, and documented by the owner, would have caused mitigation to be extremely high (actual costs unknown, as no study was ever done since other issues also existed). Strawberry Hill had NO sewer hookups anywhere near and would have required a sewer line to be installed along Osborne. Costs for construction unknown, but a separate bond would have been required to cover those costs as the District does NOT have the power to force local citizens to pay for sewer construction and the School bond did not authorize the use of those funds for that purpose. How long would it have taken to get that Bond Passed? By the way, it would have required the 2/3 majority of voters and as it is located in Bonsall (not Vista) would have required a County Bond. Vista
Way was shown to be at a traffic level of "D" at the time Strawberry Hill was being considered, and initial impact estimates showed the school would have put it at Level "F." With the Fire Station located at Old Taylor and Vista Way, the City would have been able to force the District to widen Vista Way from Taylor to the School (not just along the frontage of the school property as Mike Vail attempted to claim). Basically, if Strawberry Hill ever did come to a vote and had passed, we might still be waiting to break ground.
Now the question back to you: Why was the Stacco Property abandoned after the passage of Prop O? VUSD had an option on the property back in the late 1990’s when the original concept of a 3rd Comprehensive High School was first broached to the Public. If VUSD had been serious about eliminating overcrowding at its seriously overcrowded High Schools (remember we were pushing 7000 students between the two schools back then), they’d have exercised the option rather than let it expire. Instead, VUSD chose to build the Grade Schools FIRST! Even though with MTYR all students at grade schools were actually receiving 10.5 hours a year more classroom time than they are today, and no classrooms were over crowded in K-5. In fact, VUSD was intent upon not only building the new Grade Schools, but also made a very serious attempt at obtaining the property for one of the two k-8 schools. The plan was to actually build that school before even starting Rancho Minerva Middle School. Had this happened, VUSD would have run out of money before getting even half the grading done at the 76/Melrose site.
If you are such a “Smart taxpayer” maybe you can explain why Stacco was abandoned, and the Dual Magnet High Schools scheduled for DEAD LAST? By the way, it was NOT the two person Minority that Killed Stacco, and Hubbard (an Environmental Attorney) was well aware of the problems at Strawberry Hill. The only reason Strawberry Hill was even put up as a possible site was due to the timing of an election where the Majority believed they could use it as a beginning chip to gain an additional seat. Since it never came to a vote, we cannot say how any of the Board members would have voted, and so we can’t actually say the Minority blocked Strawberry Hill.
Your turn to show more of your “Smarts and knowledge of TRUTH in and around VUSD!”

To Hit a Nerve wrote on May 1, 2008 8:36 PM:As Vista Watchdog states: since Strawberry Hill never came to a vote, your claim that the Minority blocked Strawberry Hill is a loss according to the rule of agumentation and debate: Point to Vista Bow Wow!

As for the Grant obtained by Sinn: before you can obtain a point on this one you will need to not only "prove" that it was "Actually" in progress before Sinn's arrival, but also that he did nothing to aid in the application, or that it woud have been won without his assistance. As there is no way to prove it would have been won without him, no points can be obtained pursuing this line of argument. Draw - However, VW seems to have realized this line was mute and avoided it all together, therefor VW receives a point for Technical, as he was not sucked into that line.

You might want to quit before you give away the farm on this argument. Seems you really need to return to school and take some more Argumentation and Debate classes.

Mike wrote on May 1, 2008 10:34 PM:Leave my wife out of this!

Samuel wrote on May 4, 2008 12:34 PM:I will again state that I am not a member of the Board. As far as no rebuttal on the Greg Sinn matter I note that you chose to ignore my analogy of a new sports manager cleaning house and bringing in his own people to help turn a team around. There is nothing to rebut on the grant position. And, as far as the Strawberry Hills property is concerned I can’t improve on the comments from the Vista Watchdog. The cost to prepare the site would have been a lot more than the $4 million that you cited. I note that you chose not to respond to Vista Watch Dog’s comments regarding the magnet schools being on the far edge of the District and the price of gasoline that will keep parents from enrolling their kids. Last but not least no one is paying attention to the upcoming fines from the State when it is shown that the District has violated the Williams Agreement terms. Keep on blogging! Your comments generate responses that help others understand the true facts.

To EJ Hit a Nerve wrote on May 4, 2008 8:17 PM:Point to Samuel: you failed to address his argument on the sports analogy.
Point to VW: As noted by Samuel you failed to address the argument concerning gasoline/transportation costs to get children to and from the new magnet(?) high schools.
Looks like Hit a Nerve's point attempts have all failed just like VUSD's attempt at educating children.
So Stacy, when will you be giving us all a new subject for our next debate? The school year is drawing to a close and the next election is just around the corner. There are plenty of subjects out there and we are all looking forward to these lively contests. Maybe you can take a look at the Williams Agreement issue mentioned by Samuel? Or maybe a look back at the original Prop O Text and the Many Promises published in your paper that aided in its passage and compare these things to what has actually been delivered? That should help the people see what has really happened over the last 6 years, and just what they have received for their money. Or maybe you could look at the test scores over the past 6 to 10 years and provide us with a nice little piece showing how well(?) students have done before and after the building of new schools? Come on Stacy, I'm sure they taught you a thing or two about investigative reporting back in those Journalism classes. Let us see your best stuff!

Mike wrote on May 5, 2008 5:31 AM:I said: Leave my wife out of this!