Comments by jlundell
A five-year update to my original numbers: no change in trend, with overall CUSD enrollment at a new low since its 1997-98 peak. The trends were briefly reversed in 2009-10, perhaps as a result of the recession, but that reversal was itself reversed, and then some, the next year.
I had just assumed that (almost) nobody was paying it...
I feel a marketing campaign coming on: Visit the dissolute Coastside!
That's pretty cute. I don't see a way to refine their street numbering, though.
The charter review folks weren't exactly impartial--they had definite views on the question, not so far removed from the supes. But they had the sense to recommend a popular vote anyway.
Perhaps we should look at it from the supes' point of view, though: how could any system that had the good sense to anoint these noble fellows our leaders be anything less that ideal?
"Arrogance" is the word that comes to mind, watching the supes sitting there congratulating themselves on how well they represent all of us.
A proportional representation system would be fairer and more democratic than single-member districts, but the current at-large system is the worst.
For more on the subject of proportional representation (PR), see my PR Foundation site.
I rather like the idea of small, local schools like Kings Mnt. Under the current circumstances, though, I don't see how the district can justify extracting an extra quarter of a million dollars (their figure) from the other sites to subsidize it. It should really be a charter, perhaps associated with Woodside if CUSD won't have it. WRT CSR, I'd like to see classes of maybe 12-15 students, but that's obviously a pipe dream. If there were better evidence that 20 had an academic payoff, then CSR generally…
I voted for E, somewhat reluctantly, given my general dislike of parcel taxes . I agree with Carl to this extent: it seems to me that CUSD's budget priorities are not tied very tightly to academic performance concerns. According to the district's numbers, it spends twice as much per student at Kings Mountain as at the other K-5 sites, which strikes me as indefensible. Yet Kings Mountain wasn't on the table. (It seems to me that if Kings Mountain is to remain open, it should do so as a charter school.)…
Good to know....
Kevin imagines that because there's one way of collecting data from cell phones (Google Maps) it must be the only one.
BTW, Lee, if you're concerned about being tracked (and I'm not unsympathetic with that concern), you might want to turn off your cell phone when you drive. A private outfit is tracking your phone's continuously broadcast unique ID and selling the data commercially. That's how Google Maps shows traffic data on Hwy 1 south of 92, on Hwy 84, El Camino, etc.
Of course, we'd all be safer if we all turned off our phones while driving, so maybe it's not that big a deal.
I"ve been using the graphs for a long time now (as well as 511.org) and they're pretty good. The main limitation is that they measure end-to-end transit time, no actual vehicle speed, so there's a lag between a traffic blockage and when it gets 'seen' by the system. There's a surprising number of transponders going over the hill, it appears.
Lee: you did, when you accepted the privacy notice: http://www.511.org/privacy.asp
The Coastside Land Trust has a wildflower workshop and tour this Saturday: http://coastsidelandtrust.org/newandevents/current.html
Speaking of winner-take-all, I've been working on a new website aimed at education on the subject of proportional representation. It's a work in progress, but I invite you to have a look: http://prfound.org
If winner-take-all is unfair at the state level, it's just as unfair at the congressional district level; you're just disenfranchising a different set of voters.
The NPV looks like the best shot we have at a solution, barring a constitutional amendment.
I've had essentially the same experience as Tim, driving in rural and semi-rural Sweden. Small-scale roundabouts are a blessing, and I'd much rather encounter one than a conventional intersection.
Large-scale roundabouts (I'm thinking Charles de Gaulle-étoile, which has pedestrian underpasses btw) can be a little scary. But I'd expect to get used to them pretty quickly.
NWS at 11 (more detail; no real change). Tsunami Warning center. Biggest concern will be south to southwest facing beaches. Outside of our area the latest model runs show a 4.6 foot wave at Pismo Beach in San Luis Obispo County. No real change in wave arrival times with 12:31pm at Santa Barbara and 1:26pm at San Francisco. Forecast wave heights still 3.3 feet for Half Moon Bay and 0.7 feet for San Francisco. Local areas of increased concern would be north side of Monterey Bay in the vicinity of Santa…
NWS at 10:10: "Latest intel from the Tsunami Warning center brings initial waves into Santa Barbara at 12:31pm this afternoon… reaching San Francisco around 1:26pm. Forecast wave heights along the California coast include 4.6 feet at Pismo Beach… 3.3 feet at Half Moon Bay and 0.7 feet at San Francisco."
Page 1 of 13 pages 1 2 3 > Last ›