Foothills Sentry - December 2022

Foothills Sentry Page 4 December 2022 JOHNSON MOTORCARS 31 Years of Specializing in the Service and Repair of Mercedes-Benz Gary Johnson 714-997-2567 982 N. Batavia # B13, Orange, CA 92867 gary@johnsonmotorcars.com For a peaceful holiday Precipitation With the rain came the county's voluntary evacuation notification early afternoon on Monday, Nov. 7, and sheriffs cruising our canyons to politely invite residents to leave. By afternoon of Election Day, the evac was mandatory and that evening dozens of vehicles were parked at the entrance of Silverado, with less accommodating officers actively preventing entrance, as well as to Williams and Modjeska. Better safe than sorry, and the walk home in a gentle rain that night was invigorating. Voting continued through 8 p.m. on Monday at Library of the Canyons, but the facility was closed on Election Day. Ironic, as canyon activists had lobbied for its opening. Same-day or vote-by-mail ballot droppers presumably found their way to Santiago Canyon College or used the secure box at Concourse Park. Precipitous participation Voter participation was up sig- nificantly in the canyons, with a turnout of over 63% of eligibles. Campaign sign thievery was down, happily. All politics, goes the maxim, is local but some lo- cals are loco, if also instructively discriminating in their cartoonish noncommitment to representa- tive democracy and free speech. This election season they stole exclusively the campaign signs of the Democratic candidate for our newly formed 40th Congressional district seat. Volunteers replaced them daily in a stubborn if amus- ing ritual likely affecting the race not one bit. Anti-choice Repub- lican Young Kim defeated pro- choice Democrat Dr. Asif Mah- mood in all three of our precincts. Indeed, among canyon vot- ers, Kim and all Republican candidates for higher office won though county-wide of course the Dems were overall victori- ous. Funny that most local voters couldn’t even identify by name the GOP’s gubernatorial cham- pion. The only sign spotted for him was in front of a house with a Trump banner, both intact. No pickles, hold the mayo In a nonpartisan local race, the “BLT” slate, a three-person team of Brittney Kuhn, Ted Wright, and Laurie Martz, won a board majority at the Silverado- Modjeska Recreation and Parks District (SMRPD). Two sitting directors chose not to run (Isabell Kerins and Kevin Topp), and recently appointed Director Jessie Bullis was defeated. Martz, the highest vote getter, bested the respective local totals for both state gubernatorial candidates, with 439 votes. Kuhn, the next highest, and Wright, third, were also winners in the six-way race which also included John Nelson and Andrew Ward. Martz has not indicated plans to take on Newsom or Dahle anytime soon. Local activist Linda May elaborates on the SMRPD race: “When campaign filing opened, there was little interest in this race for the only taxpayer-supported government entity exclusively serving the canyons. Word spread, and worried community members recruited the three candidates. By the end of filing, there were six choices. The winning slate worked together, with supporters distributing handmade yard signs, lapel stickers, and neighbors calling neighbors to campaign.” BLT signs were not stolen. Ap- parently, handmade is the way to go. Outgoing Board President Kerins wasted little time acknowledging (Nov. 9!) the then-tentative results, quickly inviting the public to a Nov. 25 swearing-in ceremony, well before final election tallies were in. A statement from the new delicatessen, err, delegation, reads as follows: “BLT (Brittney, Laurie and Ted) appreciates the support we received. We're excited to represent our community! We honor the huge efforts of retiring board members and look forward to working with the continuing, (fantastic) board members. We're looking for community input on new programs and activities.” Meanwhile, current (fantastic) Vice President Rusty Morris reports that the Silverado Community Center and the Children's Center are getting “delayed maintenance” including work on the floors and painting of the Center, and repairs, paint, new doors and windows for the SCC. Modjeska is on the list, she says, pending an ADA assessment. “Prepare to Stop” The “slow” signs and flashing electronic message boards on Santiago Canyon Road, bobcats and trucks, steel plates, and jolly bright-vested troupe of traffic concierges are familiar to driv- ers on Santiago Canyon Road, who’ve gotten used to delays and bumps. Now scheduled to be completed by Dec. 31, burying power lines in our region is part of the utility’s ongoing efforts at “grid hardening” to mitigate future wind, fire and flood disaster. The undergrounding project on Santiago Canyon and Silverado Canyon Road will be followed by removal of the former overhead infrastructure (including poles) through early January; however, this should no longer have an impact on traffic in the area. Partridge, pear tree … Regular Tuesday storytime readings at the Library of the Canyons go holiday-style with a special Dec. 20 Special Ginger- bread Storytime. 11:30 a.m. Park pageantry Saturday, Dec. 10 marks the return of the annual canyon holiday fair, “Christmas in the Canyons,” this year at the Silverado Community Center. Local artisans offer their work for sale. Live music, hay rides, and Santa, too! "Panorama Heights" continued from page 1 of the minimum conditions re- quired for approval and granted their request in November 2017. Orange Unified appealed the decision to the California Department of Education (CDE). It claimed that Panorama Heights families wanted to move to TUSD to increase property values; that such a transfer would promote racial and ethnic segregation; the loss of students would negatively affect Panorama Elementary; and the loss of students and assessed valuation would reduce state funding for the district. Waiting to happen When OUSD’s appeal was filed, Graham and Lampson were told by the CDE that, due to back- log, it could take three years or more to be heard. The pandemic added another two years. When the TUSD/OUSD boundary change rose to the top of the pile at the state level, their kindergarteners were in middle school. CDE staff conducted a lengthy review and analysis of the administrative record, listened to the recordings of all associated hearings, and ultimately recom- mended approval of the parents’ request. It found that the criteria for transfer had been met, and that any resulting demographic changes in either district would be insignificant. The transfer involved 429 households, with 127 impacted students. A number of those students had already been granted interdistrict transfers and attended TUSD schools (Graham’s among them). It further noted that Panorama Heights students attending OUSD would not be compelled to change districts if the boundaries were altered. One way or the other “Although the CDE finds no compelling reason to transfer the territory,” the staff report said, “it also finds no concerns compel- ling enough to reverse the county committee’s approval. The CDE gives significant weight to the discretionary authority of a coun- ty committee, since it is in a better position to understand the local educational needs and concerns of the districts and communities affected.” A differing opinion The case was heard by the CDE Board of Trustees Nov. 2. Its dis- cussion focused on two issues raised in OUSD’s appeal: socio- economic impacts of the transfer, and OUSD’s assertion that inter- district transfers were already an option for Panorama parents. OUSD had noted that its per- centages of socio-economically disadvantaged students are two to three times higher than in TUSD. Similarly, percentages of English Learner (EL) students are three to five times higher, and the per- centages of students eligible for the FRPM (free or reduced-price meal) program are two to three times higher. OUSD claimed the transfer would increase that dis- parity. Regarding interdistrict transfers, OUSD Superintendent Gunn Marie Hansen told the state board that any parent can request a transfer and that “no transfers have been denied on appeal.” Parents however, dispute that, reporting that transfers are not guaranteed, that most aren’t aware of the appeal process and that they must reapply every year. “It makes it harder on the kids when they don’t know from one year to the next which school they’ll be attending,” Graham says. Based on those issues, the board unanimously upheld OUSD’s ap- peal and rejected the county com- mittee’s approval. Stuck in the middle “I’m disappointed,” Graham says of the decision. “Not because it didn’t go our way, but that the facts, data and recommendations were ignored. The board didn’t adjudicate on the criteria, but on the premise that El Modena pro- vides more free lunches to stu- dents than Foothill. I am dumb- founded how one agency can disregard the state education code and its own recommendations.” The Orange County commit- tee that had approved the transfer received an update on the CDE decision at a meeting, Nov. 10. Committee members were told that either the petitioners or the committee could submit a request for reconsideration, but it must be accompanied by new facts or new arguments. Panorama Heights parent Marty Dunham was the lone North Tustin representative in the room. He told the committee that he was disappointed in the outcome because the OUSD transfer process is difficult. “Superintendent Hansen,” he said, “told the board that transfers were no problem, that none were denied on appeal. That’s false. I have evidence in writing.” While one longtime committee member pointed out that she had “never seen the state overrule a local committee,” her colleagues expressed little desire to pursue the matter further. After the meeting, committee member Kathy Moffat, an OUSD trustee, asked Durham about his claim that Hansen’s statement was false. She was surprised to learn that his neighbors had emails from the assistant super- intendent saying “appeal denied,” and agreed to look into it further. She asked Dunham to stay in touch with her. Rejected transfer area Chapman University has pur- chased an apartment building in Anaheim’s Platinum Triangle to provide additional housing for students. The new residence hall, to be named Chapman Court, is lo- cated at 2045 S. State College Boulevard. The university’s $160 million acquisition will offer stu- dents a building with individual unit amenities, including washers and dryers in every apartment, a full kitchen with appliances, and a large on-site fitness center. Increasing student housing is a Chapman increases campus housing continuing goal for the university, and the new building will raise the university’s capacity to almost 55 percent of the total undergraduate population. At Chapman, first- and second- year students are required to live in campus housing, but in recent years the university has seen a dramatic increase (175% between 2017-2019) in juniors and seniors requesting campus housing due to the appeal of apartment-style housing options. An opening date for the new Chapman Court has not been set.