- - - - - - - Langley Free Press Welcomes Your Comments - - - - - - - - - Name Email URL is optional
The School Board Trustees should get a public podium with a time left green, yellow and red light public speaker's warning system to limit their rants and provide automatic cut out on red. I suggest they call Cllr. Jordan Bateman who ran with the LLT who still probably can get set up with this rig since the LLT was famous for it!
Went to the middle school forum last night. It was informative and got some good insight on the middle school concepts that are being applied in Abbottsford and Coquitlam.
The only disgusting thing that happened was one Trustee felt it necessary to publicly try to discredit one of the presenters invited by the Board/District to present. To tell you the truth I was not surprised at this especially from what we have been witnesses to this year. Mr.Lenarduzzi turned around the discord created by this Trustee’s public display. Then the 60 some odd parents present to learn about middle schools and wanting some dialogue on it continued. Too bad the chair of the board was not there to see the conduct of his fellow board member. The Code of Conduct should be read by the board for it appeared to serveral people whom spoke to me that one of the Trustees on the board doesn’t know it or how to apply it. I wonder if the district will have trouble getting presenters to come since word will move fast on how disrespectful our board of Trustees can be? That would be whom she was representing right? Of the seven board members all were present with the exception of Mr. Burton.
Susan,
I was left without any confidence that what was presented would correlate at all to what is being proposed here in Langley. Before I would consider sending my child into a middle school I would want to have seen at least a year of planning and preparation including extensive teacher training and relationship building with the grade 5's. It was also disappointing to see that the district isn't really sold on this themselves. They didn't even invite families from the Brookswood and Willoughby area to try to inform them about the concepts. And if they ever prepare a ridiculous comparison of costs by school like McAvoy's, the middle school would be seen as the most expensive and inefficient way to educate kids. Yet finances was the big drive toward the reconfigurations. Something smells fishy.
I agree with most of what you have stated Anonymous. That is why I do not believe that the board as a whole can maintain their stance. There seems to be other options available that can and should be considered. Another I was told about was with LSS closure ACSS could be rejuvenated as a sports centre. The Township council could do an exchange of property. They take LSS as a custodial residence for Macleod PARK and Homeless shelter and give the District Property to create a sports track for ACSS. This could possibly help revitalize the Aldergrove community as well with the 2010 games coming. The placement of a homeless shelter in the LSS area would not affect the quality of private residential areas as much. You know the people that pay the taxes.
Susan,
I think that you're doing a great job of holding trustees toes to the fire so to speak. I believe though that the actual increase of 50 students is over last year. They actually have 200 more than they projected. The study used by the school board shows that enrolment will be increasing by 2011 at the lates and will increase for the next 25 plus years. I know that they only actually allow the public to see the numbers up to 2010 but Bonnie Kilistoff (sp?) located the source and brought it to the attention of the board in the spring.
Susan, who is Keith Richmond and what experience does he have in School Board matters? I see that he also obviously does not promote your comments because he links to Jordan's site and not yours at this site, why?
Edited By Siteowner
Good question about the link anonymous.
I believe it is for political reasons that Langley politics does not refer to the Free Press. Keith is a parent in the district with elementary students as far as I know. I do not know what experience if any he has with School board matters. It is sad that because of these games they do not use this site for reference for I try to be informative to parents. I actually feel it does both of them a disservice to be seen playing this way. I on numerous occasions have referred to this site on Langley Politics but it has always been edited out. I have only seen it referenced once, I believe when Sam was doing the monitoring. I believe with all due respect to Keith that my reports are way more complete and informative.
Proud Parent I will be posting actual enrolment numbers at the end of October. I reported what was stated at the meeting and will be reporting on the numbers reported to the ministry.
Keep checking here and I look forward to conversation on this. The fore casting for 2011 also states the increased enrolment will be on the slope and Langley North more so then the Central and South. Of coarse they have been proven wrong in their forecasts before though.
Susan et al,
I was at the meeting and I know that there was confusion on the numbers. When asked to clarify the speaker stated that these were increases over last year vs projections o a loss of 150. As to the increase on the slope, this has been the point that many have been making. It seems logical to transport the NEW students from the slope to LSS or their choice if it is not already full rather than bus all of the kids to LSS from Stafford, close a high school to open a middle school and looking at the numbers close 3-4 elementary schools (of 
. Of course as numbers go up they will then need to reverse all of these decisions again and blow yet more money. The bottom line is that you and others have come up wth alot of great ideas but the 4 trustees have blindrs on.
sorry emoticons are new to me! The smiley face should have read "of eight" ie closure of 3-4 of the original eight elementary schools
Too many schools will have to close with the option put forth by District Administration. I also believe that the Grade 5's will have to mature quickly due to their new social responsibility placed upon them. Which will have a ripple effect into the middle etc. It was stated at the middle school presentation that the Teachers would guide the grade fives to become the new mentors. This is an additional responsibility placed upon them and they too will need special training. When will the cost and training end with this?
This is beginning to sound like another choice program that will cost many dollars for something that is not proven to be different or to work on a stand alone situation.
There has been another suggestion for LSS and that is to make it an Adult Education Center. As you have stated proud parent there is many many alternates that do not require the gutting of our community Elementary Schools.
Anon says: Susan, who is Keith Richmond and what experience does he have in School Board matters? I see that he also obviously does not promote your comments because he links to Jordan's site and not yours at this site, why?
Anon, Susan is essentially correct. I am a fundie parent (one in elementary, one in middle school) having watched district happenings for five years. I really am impassioned about public education and watch with great interest, since the decision that impact our kids impact the next generation of our society;s leaders. And, no, I am not running for the board. I have already been asked and have declined. 
I also have the highest of regard for people who are willing to take on such a responsibility for very little pay, regardless on wheter I agree with tehm or not. Hats off to all of them.
The previous comment was accidentally posted by me as anonymous.
Susan says: I believe with all due respect to Keith that my reports are way more complete and informative.
Keith says: I am not about to disagree, Susan.
Proud parent says: I know that they only actually allow the public to see the numbers up to 2010 but Bonnie Kilistoff (sp?) located the source and brought it to the attention of the board in the spring.
Keith says: I referred to Bonnie's compelling presentation on my blog last spring, but it should be also noted that her numbers included a ll grades from K to 12. If you look at only the high school numbers, those numbers actually don't go up for another 7 year boyond the numbers that bonnie presented. I hope to find the time to blog abotu long term enrolment projections in the next future.
Boy do I need to check my spelling! :P
Susan says (about my not linking to LPF): It is sad that because of these games they (I presume Keith and Jordan?) do not use this site for reference for I try to be informative to parents.
Keith says: Susan, I honestly don't read here that often, as I find there is a lot of the same point being made repeatedly (present company excepted) . I glance here occasionally and usually just scan for school issues now and again, since that is my main interest.
The first time I posted here, LPF editor made a number of incorrect presumptions about me. Full credit where it is due, those comments were subsequently withdrawn, but the deed was done.
I am not interested in being flamed, so I don't come by or post that often on LFP. Disagreement and open debate, in my opinion, is natural and healthy in a democratic soceity, as long as the tone and word choice remains respectful.
Susan's report stated: Due to the lateness in time and likely because the Board considers question period as not important business, they did not extend Tuesday night’s Board meeting.
Keith muses: I think another reason is that the board was not interested in giving would-be-city-mayor Dave Hall a free public platform from which to campaign.
All five people who lined up (including Hall) got to ask their initial questions. Chair Burton stated that the fifth person would be the last questioner, so Hall didn't get his second go 'round.
Be honest. You are strategically set you up as a promoted competitor to Susan because of the political anti Richter phobia by her competitors on council. You also link only to LP and not LFP which says a lot that you donn't comment on as to why. I also wonder if there could there be any other ties there as well? The commenters that you say are flamed here invariably deserve it because they don't contribute but rather rant and rave about the Richter phobia or because they are insulted at any commentary about Bateman that is not positive. I am surprised that they are displayed at all. Flaming about Richter on LP is common. I believe that some councillors also flame Richter here using assumed names and they are the biggest flamers as you call them.
Well Said. The ranting vemon spewers on LFP are invariably those that politically or OTHERWISE do not like LFP's political point of view and especially those that fear or dislike (mildly put) Cllr. Richter and that is FLAMED more so by any comments herein that questions any of the rest of council (especially by Jordan's Junkies) or as I like to call them, the'good ole boys club'. Because that is exactly what they are.
Sadly the newest members elected have also fallen into line behind the established good ole boys.
LFP's point of view is simply put that the good ole boys club are spending like drunken sailors either because they don't care or because they don't know any better.Hence out of control tax increases which are especially unfair to the established long term rural and semi-rural taxpayers. Also the lack of open public discussion is intolerable and arrogant.
Our stance is clear and has remained unchanged. If you don't like it or don't agree with this opinion so be it because frankly Scarlet I don't give a damm.
So If Mr. Richmond thinks that the same point is being made often, he is correct just as much as the same points of criticism by others about the school board has become a perpetual and repetitive mantra as well, including his very own! The real issue is not being repetitive, the issue is its the uncomfortable truth! If its true, its uncomfortable for both establishments and it's supporting junkies. Mr. Richmond does not have to promote LFP and he can choose to promote J.B. 's LP as much as he likes just as we can choose to not promote either LP or Mr. Richmond's vanity sites either. This Editor can also choose to ban these vemon's authors as well but we have been clearly more tolerant than our competitor from my understanding as demonstrated by letting this vemon stand. (P.S. This Ed. did not know about the linking to LP you mentioned, curious, ty.)
To get a message out to create any change it has to be real and repeated especially to the 95% that spend less than 5 minutes a week on municipal politics.
Look at the voting records. Look at the lack of discussion. Look at the tax increases. They treat the public purse and open council discussion with disdain just as the School Board apparently treats public input and discussion with disdain.
We must be doing something right though as our traffic of LOCAL readers has doubled in the first year and that traffic then tripled in the second year. Essentially a 5 to 6 fold increase of real Langley readers. The key is it is LOCAL and we don't count the ~75% majority which is national and international. So we don't brag about those hits just because they are there. Otherwise we could brag about 100k plus visitors a year. That is not our intended audience. You in Langley are our intended audience.
Thank you for that and please remember to get out and vote next year. It's time for a change in Langley. It's time to get rid of the 'Good Ole Boys Club'. It's time for fiscal responsibility and non-discriminatory open discusion.
Keith, who asked you to run for school board? Your buddy Jordan? His Slate? His old LLT Party? Kurt Alberts? His Slate? Or are they all together the same now?
LFF Ed says: The ranting vemon spewers on LFP are invariably those that politically or OTHERWISE do not like LFP's political point of view and especially those that fear or dislike (mildly put) Cllr. Richter...
Keith says: Nope, the only people who have spewed venom my way are Richter supporters, which is interesting since it is no secret that I voted for her last election, and even speculated openly on this blog that she should run for mayor, given her fiscal position and the need for some real competition to challenge Kurt Alberts. LFP Editor does not lend much in the way of encouraging me to continue in that line of thinking. I would imagine I am not alone.
Anon says: Be honest. You are strategically set you up as a promoted competitor to Susan because of the political anti Richter phobia by her competitors on council.
Keith says: Nope, Susan's posts are actually quite good. She give a full report, I only give highlights that I personally find interesting. In fact, at the moment, Susan is the only reason I read this blog at all.
Anon says: You also link only to LP and not LFP which says a lot that you don't comment on as to why.
Keith says: You need but ask.
1) Jordan is willing to put his real name behind what he says. On the other hand, LFP editor, like you, refuses to use a real name and actually be held accountable for his/her posts.
2) Jordan disagrees respectfully on his blog. LPF Editor does not.
LFP ED says: So If Mr. Richmond thinks that the same point is being made often, he is correct just as much as the same points of criticism by others about the school board has become a perpetual and repetitive mantra as well, including his very own!
Ketih says: on what basis? My theme is school board issues, true, but I don't push the same slant in every post. I believe I tend to have a pretty balanced commentary on things I support and things I don't. I am in no one's pocket.
LLT Flamers says: Keith, who asked you to run for school board? Your buddy Jordan? His Slate? His old LLT Party? Kurt Alberts? His Slate? Or are they all together the same now?
Keith says: None of the above. Only people who have known me for a while, and none of them, to my knowledge, have been on the school board, city or township councils (or mayor), or any Langley slates.
LFP says: Mr. Richmond does not have to promote LFP and he can choose to promote J.B. 's LP as much as he likes just as we can choose to not promote either LP or Mr. Richmond's vanity sites either.
Keith says: On that much, we agree.
Commenting by HaloScan
