Comments by Wendy:
"We probably could charge an entrance fee for the CLA board meeting Oct.30th & could go towards the Stafford Legal Fund box.
Did u also know @ approximately 6:30 pm,we are starting the evening off wth a candle light vigil out front on grass by the tall trees(if not raining)the same evening.The more the merrier.Come one,come all.Singing too.
This evening is going to be out of this world and go down for the most liveliest School Board meeting EVER!
Wendy Minar


Thanks for the information Wendy yes it will be one I believe that will go down in the Langley History books. Maybe there should be a presale of tickets? I understand that there may not be enough room even at this venue.
I wonder if they have any over flow rooms? I think they do have TV feed of presenters in the hallways right?
Susan Semonick | 10.27.07 - 11:01 am | #

Well is anyone curious about the DPAC survey results?
Apparently the information according to the web site will be given to the Trustee's prior to their vote. Bruce, Graham, Darlene or any Member of DPAC can you enlighten us? Will they be posting the results soon I hope? Since once it is given to the Trustees it is definitely public information.
Susan Semonick | 10.27.07 - 11:04 pm | #

I haven't heard anything Susan. But I am not sure how much confidence I would have in it anyway. The Stafford area schools were told that these couldn't be distributed within the school. It appears that the Superintendant is intimidated by parent opinion.
Darlene | 10.28.07 - 2:32 pm | #

The Langley DPAC survey is posted if I had to put it into one word it would be "IRRELEVANT".

The Maple Ridge Board of Education has rejected the reccommendations of the District staff to close 3 schools.

This was done on October 24th. They want to slow things down and do more research. Maybe our board can take lead from this.
Susan Semonick | 10.29.07 - 11:03 am | #

Actually, Susan, it was kind of revealing. The response was primarily from the affected schools, though LSS had a very low response. Which does support the position that they are not really being affected by the changes.
Darlene | 10.29.07 - 8:12 pm | #

You must agree though that the inclusion of the comments would be way more informative. The fact that only 4 people out of the 62 responses accept the middle school concept tells you something too. You are an informed parent many others are not and would not get much out of the posting. I am glad you have found it useful. See you tomorrow.

The last Special needs inquiry had about 50 people in attendance it was enlightening. Paterson and Cody were in attendance for most of it. It went from 7 to 10:15 pm
Susan Semonick | 10.29.07 - 11:20 pm | #

Susan,
I don't understand why the comments were not included. What was the point of asking for comments and then not providing them as part of the results?
Darlene | 10.30.07 - 1:08 am | #

I do not know you will have to take that up with the President of DPAC who was in charge of it all. I know the Trustees will receive them so we can ask for it from them. Strange isn’t that the Trustees can have it yet members can’t?

I know that it would be interesting to see the back up documentation the Trustees have on all the people that have been stated as supporting the middle school concept. To date nothing has been produced other than the approximate 8 members on the LSS PAC and three people in the paper we haven’t seen or heard anymore than that. While the against group is close to the 2,000 mark if not more that have written letters, presented, signed petitions etc….
Susan Semonick | 10.30.07 - 10:13 am | #