Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-09-21 City Schools Liaison Committee Summary Minutes City/School Liaison Committee Meeting Page 1 SCHOOL/CITY LIAISON COMMITTEE PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT CITY OF PALO ALTO DATE: September 21, 2017 MINUTES FOR MEETING OF September 21, 2017 Opening The School/City Committee held a special meeting in the District Conference Room A at 25 Churchill Ave, Palo Alto. The meeting was called to order at 8:09 a.m. * All handouts can be viewed in the Business Services Office 25 Churchill Ave. Palo Alto Unified School District Representatives: Melissa Baten Caswell, Board Member, Committee Chair Ken Dauber, Board Member Cathy Mak, Chief Business Officer City of Palo Alto Representatives: Liz Kniss, Council Member Eric Filseth, Council Member (Absent) Lydia Kou, Council Member (Substitute for Filseth) Rob de Geus, Community Services Director Oral Communications No requests were made to address the Committee. Approval of Minutes – August 17, 2017 MOTION: The approval of the August 17, 2017, minutes was deferred to the next meeting. Update on District Enrollment Mak presented on the District’s enrollment with the following slides: -Update: PAUSD Enrollment History -Elementary School 11th/14th Day Enrollment -Middle School 11th/14th Day Enrollment -High School 11th/14th Day Enrollment -Current Enrollment by Grade Level -K-5 Class Size Average Comparison 2012-14 through 2017-18 -Available Elementary Classrooms (17-18) -Elementary Summary -Grades 6-8 2017-18 Enrollment Summary -Middle School Summary -Enrollment Summary Grades 9-12 -High School Summary -Grade Span Growth Summary Growth from 2016-17 to 2017-18 (Not including Children’s Hospital, Alta Vista, or Middle College) -Comparison with Enrollment Growth Forecast vs. 14th Day Enrollment Growth -Middle School Average Class Size by Grade Level – Core & World Language -High School Average Class Size by Grade Level – World Language Kou pointed out the decline at the elementary level is 110 students, what is the decline at the middle school level. Mak said the decline at the middle schools is 82 students and at the high schools there is an increase of 161 students. Starting this year, the high schools are experiencing a growth and it will continue for the next two years. Caswell reported the high schools are close to 2000 and they are built out to handle 2250. Kniss asked if this is the highest enrollment they have seen at the high schools. Caswell said she believes so. Mak reported this year they have provided additional staffing at the middle and high schools so class City/School Liaison Committee Meeting Page 2 MINUTES FOR MEETING OF September 21, 2017 sizes are lower. Kniss asked if this affects the number of teachers. Mak said yes, it does. Kniss mentioned accuracy of this report is important because it will allow them to see where they are seeing growth in the community. Kniss asked what schools will be affected with new housing at Stanford. Caswell said Nixon, Escondido, Terman, Jordan, and Gunn. Kniss asked if Nixon is larger than Escondido. Mak said no, but if you look at the regular program, it is since Escondido has two strands of Spanish immersion so it has a higher enrollment. Discussion and Update about Changes to VTA Bus Routes, Palo Alto Shuttle and Stanford’s Marguerite City Transportation Programs Manager Phillip Kamhi presented on the Final VTA Transit Service Plan + Palo Alto Transit Vision Plan update with the following slides: - Final VTA Transit Service Plan + Palo Alto Transit Vision Plan Context - Palo Alto Free Shuttle Existing Services -Existing Crosstown Route -Existing Embarcadero Route -Palo Alto Free Shuttle – August 4, 2017 -Palo Alto Free Shuttle Operating Statistics Peer Comparison -Palo Alto Free Shuttle Compared to TNC’s -Where are the Service Gaps? -Final VTA Transit Service Plan -Next Network Impacts to Palo Alto -Current Route 88 Service -Palo Alto Transit Vision Plan Outreach -South Palo Alto Variant A -Crosstown Variant B -Embarcadero Variant C -Palo Alto Transit Vision Plan - Resource Impacts -Planning-level Cost Estimates – Routes Expansion -Summary -Map Service Plan Caswell asked if the peer comparison is only for the summer. Kamhi said no, it is for year-round. Kou asked if there are other shuttles that are free. Kamhi said only the Emery Go Round and Irvine iShuttle are free; Sam Trans and VTA charge fees. Caswell asked if school times change will there be flexibility from VTA. Kamhi mentioned VTA would check the school time schedules to make sure they are meeting the bell times. It is probably part of their typical planning process. Dauber asked what time is the late afternoon run. Kamhi said he does not believe it has been scheduled. VTA will start looking into it in June; it will probably align with the coming year’s school schedule. The service would start in August. Caswell mentioned that if recent proposed legislation goes through, the schedules might need to change in September 2018. Kamhi believes VTA will check in with the schools regarding schedules. Caswell asked if Crosstown Variant B (VTA 21 Supplemental) would replace their current route. Kahmi said yes, it would go by JLS Middle School. VTA staff was strongly against this particular concept which was attached to the Council report but supported the concept on Crosstown Variant A. City/School Liaison Committee Meeting Page 3 MINUTES FOR MEETING OF September 21, 2017 Kou asked what the frequency is for the City shuttle. Kahmi said 30 minutes and VTA is also 30 minutes. Kou said so they are the same. Kahmi said yes, the initial thought was for the shuttle to run every 15 minutes along that same corridor but VTA indicated no one would ride their bus if the City shuttle is free and VTA charges a fee. Kniss asked if they have heard from some of the other schools. Kahmi said he is not sure he is the best person to ask since he has only been with the City six months and most of that was the summer. Kniss said she just knows there are a lot of other schools in the area and they have not heard from those other schools. Kahmi indicated he manages the Safe Routes to Schools team and it will definitely be something he will keep in tune with as the school year progresses. Caswell mentioned Castilleja has created their own shuttles so they have their own solutions. Kou said it would also be helpful if the private schools also have a Transportation Management Association in place. Caswell asked if the Caltrain Joint Powers Board (JPB) would not pay for this new plan for the Embarcadero Route 2018. Kahmi said no, they have a set amount of $100,000 they will contribute to this shuttle. Caswell asked but will they contribute to the expanded Crosstown shuttle plan. Kahmi said they will contribute to the expanded Crosstown shuttle plan but they will contribute the same $100,000. That amount remains constant regardless if their operating costs go up. In years past, they have contributed more with grants. Kniss asked about the cost to run the Palo Alto shuttle. Kahmi said it is $500,000 minus the $100,000 JPB contributes. Caswell asked if they are considering the new south Palo Alto shuttle not being free. Kahmi said they have discussed it but it was not a favorable option. Also, in considering all the check and balances/procedures, it probably makes the route more expensive. If they were to do it, they might as well do it for the entire system because there is more economy of scale. If they really cannot find the funding, they will need to look at other options. Kou asked if they had a backup plan for funding the south Palo Alto shuttle. Kahmi said they do not, they hope they find the funding but if they cannot, it is likely they will come back to City Council about next steps. They are working with VTA and pursuing every grant opportunity. De Geus asked if there is an opportunity to partner with Stanford as they have the Stanford Marguerite shuttle. Kahmi said they are apprehensive to joining efforts. However, there might be an opportunity through their GUP (general use permit) process. Kou asked if they mentioned why they are apprehensive. Kahmi said he thinks they do not see it as a Stanford service and they do not have the motivation for taking on additional services. Kniss asked where the demand is coming from. Caswell said school demand is from Terman, JLS, and some percentage of Paly. Kahmi mentioned the RPP (residential parking program) is coming out in November for the south gate area. Signage will start to go up next month. Caswell added they should get this information out to the administration. Review of Recent City Council/PAUSD Board Meetings City Council: Kniss reported they discussed the Cubberley Request for Proposal (RFP). The City’s long term concern is since 1978 they have essentially helped the District land bank so for that length of time, the land has sat there; they have contributed seven million a year to the District. She was involved way at the beginning when the schools did not have money and the City did. It was done, she would say, in a very clever way to distribute money from the City to the schools. As they look at the new RFP, if the City never has control over that acreage and they are doing a long term plan, does the District want to give the City a long term lease for 25, 35 or 50 years or is the District going to continue to keep that land available for the coming enrollment bubble. Kou added mainly the RFP they decided on was for the $400,000 and the City would come back to the District to discuss all the City/School Liaison Committee Meeting Page 4 MINUTES FOR MEETING OF September 21, 2017 tasks. Caswell clarified the RFP was $400,000 total with the City and District going 50/50 each. Kniss said it is a good community center there but is that going to continue left as is for next 35 years. Caswell believes the fact the District is willing to pay for an RFP to do a master plan, their expectations is for it not to stay the same for the next 35 years. Kou said it is a great step forward because there is a great desire from the community for more community use space and it would be nice to have something newer and sustainable rather than band aid what they currently have. Caswell said having been part of all these discussions she does not believe they would be willing to spend money on the master plan if they were not willing to move forward with it. Kniss said this is very reassuring. Caswell added the Board has not voted on it yet. Dauber added the City probably has more certainty about what use can be made of the land. The District has a lot of variability on enrollment. They do not know when that variability will kick in. They need to preserve the ability to meet the needs of the District in the future. Kniss pointed out that is where they have been for years, but the long term question is going to be, can the District anticipate what will happen. They would really like to create something in combination with the District on those 35 acres. Dauber said the goal of the RFP to create something so the City can move forward with their plans. Kou added she would also hope during their discussions with the consultant that they could look into the District preserving acreage for a school and allow the remainder to be developed for the community. District: Dauber reported they will have a special meeting this afternoon to report on handling complaints of student sexual assault. They also had discussions on budget related to teacher hiring. Caswell added if legislation passes to change the school start times, they will need to work together on that. Dauber believes the legislation was defeated. Caswell thought it was delayed but they will look into it. De Geus mentioned if anyone is interested in the student exchange program. It is a very cool program and will share information. Caswell suggested he reach out to the Districts’ Chief Academic Officer Sharon Ofek. Also, they have a health fair this Saturday at City Hall. A lot of active health activities and a team debate on mental health. It is from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. De Geus added the Palo Alto Moonlight Walk is on October 6, 2017. Future Meetings and Agendas The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 19, 2017. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 a.m.