Coastal board OKs school

Full story: Daily Breeze

The California Coastal Commission on Wednesday evening approved the construction of a high school in San Pedro, ending a divisive multiyear effort to bring a new secondary campus to the southern end of Los ...

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of32
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Aqua Velva

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jan 8, 2009
 
That's it. Time to move out of Pedro when they try to bring education back to town. Just when I thought it was being turned over to the homeless, gangs, whiny longies and illegals.....
san pedro fever

San Pedro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jan 8, 2009
 
Great!! Let's celebrate this sparkling addition to our community.Since 70% of us keep voting to give LAUSD more money I'd say San Pedro is pretty solidly behind this beautiful campus.

San Pedro Movin Up!!
Longie

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jan 8, 2009
 
Aqua Velva wrote:
That's it. Time to move out of Pedro when they try to bring education back to town. Just when I thought it was being turned over to the homeless, gangs, whiny longies and illegals.....
Thats right, time for you to move so I don't have to read your stupid comments
wow

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jan 8, 2009
 
hahn called larry clark to express concerns? she's the one who called for the school district to use the Upper Reservation in the first place, back in 2006 when they were considering taking land at Ponte Vista.
john mavar

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jan 8, 2009
 

Judged:

1

Thank god!
mellonhead

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jan 8, 2009
 
"Commission staff members said their primary concern about the campus was the district's proposal to erect three dozen 50-foot wind turbines on the site. The commission moved to require a one-year study on the energy-producing turbines' effects on migratory birds, after which the district could petition to add the turbines."

From what I hear, wind turbines make a lot of noise and shouldn't be located in a residential neighborhood.
john mavar

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jan 8, 2009
 

Judged:

1

This will be perfect for our students. LA area keeps growing along with San Pedro (slower pace) but we need to accommodate our residents in a responsible matter. The Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council took a proactive approach to a project that was going to happen no mater what.
I support a new high school at Angles Gate along with the reduction of students at San Pedro High. The Angles Gate location is owned by Los Angeles Unified School District and they can do what they want with their property. But we live in a day and age when elected officials and governmental departments come to us for input. After meeting with local neighborhoods and School Board Member Dr. Richard Valodvicís staff I presented LAUSD with a laundry list of issues to help mitigate the causes of an 800 seat high school. The good news is that with my approach all of the issues will be implemented to help reduce the negative effects of a new school.
We can make projects work. Lets think outside the box.
Windmills

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jan 8, 2009
 
New windmills are silent and have less sound than the swirling air surrounding it
GO GREEN

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jan 8, 2009
 
Did you know that the California Coastal Commission has granted ONLY ONE residential permit in decades to build a new home upon Paseo del Mar's fragile bluff and that that inappropriate monstrosity endangers the stability of us in the Coastal San Pedro Neighborhood Council area. Problem solving??? You mean self-serving. How dare you tell us little folks what is green and needed and right. We will remember when it's time to vote, that you came poking around "to help solve" your personal agenda. Shame.
M Richards

Buena Park, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jan 8, 2009
 
First, I want to thank my Mayor, Larry Clark for his vote. He listened to both San Pedrans and residents of Rancho Palos Verdes and voted for the people and not for untrustworthy L.A.U.S.D.

Second, you all may want to know that John Mavar has been included with names of individuals that may seek the L.A.Council District Number 15 seat once Ms. Hahn finishes all of her terms or decides to forego a portion of her last term to run for L.A. County Supervisor.

Mr. Mavar also seems more interested in northwest San Pedro than he is for all of San Pedro, Wilmington, and the rest of the 15th District.

Now, since L.A.U.S.D. changed the previously approved plans for the new campus that were approved very recently by the Board of Education, what makes anyone truly feel they won't change plans yet again?

I think we have now all been provided clear evidence that L.A.U.S.D. will change plans, alter approvals, and do just about anything to gain more support to build SRHS 15 on the Upper Reservation of Fort MacArthur.

If you can continue to really believe that L.A.U.S.D will actually have a new swimming pool built on or near the sight, I need to remind you all that they have already have approved plans being changed in order to acquire more approval for the new campus.

How can anyone possibly believe that Alma Street WON"T become the primary access route for the new campus, as L.A.U.S.D. claims it would not be?

Since L.A.U.S.D. has demonstrated that it will do whatever it takes, even changing approved plans, in order to get the campus built, what other approved items may get changed?

This is more proof that trust cannot be regarded as something L.A.U.S.D. truly believes is essential in its processes.

And here is another thing.

The very next meeting of the California Coastal Commission is scheduled for February 4-6, 2009 in Huntington Beach, California.

L.A.U.S.D. in its attempts to get approval for the new campus so very quickly, has now had at least two lawyers, Mr. Rod Hamilton, and perhaps others being able to create vouchers for travel, meal, and other expenses for going all the way to Oceanside rather than utilizing the money saving continuance for LESS THAN one month, just so they could get approval from the CCC LESS THAN one month sooner for a project that will take YEARS to complete.

I thought I have read, heard, and encountered the terrible financial plight within L.A.U.S.D.

So rather than waiting less than one month, L.A.U.S.D. representatives spent more money to go farther to gain approval during such a dramatic time for L.A.U.S.D.

If the two lawyers that attended the meeting were being paid by the hour they began their travels and until their travels ended, doesn't it look like a real waste of money the District was willing to incur?

The next time L.A.U.S.D. bellows about its extreme financial troubles, I would like to see a comparison of the expensed incurred by going all the way to Oceanside rather than waiting less than one month and attending the meeting in Huntington Beach.

It certainly looks to me that only the classroom teachers and other faculty members are truly concerned about the financial stability of L.A.U.S.D. The bureaucrats, planners, and leaders in the District don't seem to get what has been demonstrated by more wasteful spending in these most difficult times.

Oh well, should we have thought any differently from the bureaucracy that is the Los Angeles Unified School District?

Now, more than ever before, we have more reasoning and proof that it is well past time that the District needs to be broken apart, for the students' sake at least.
M Richards

Buena Park, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jan 8, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Mr. Mavar, the majority of students attending Magnet Programs currently being conducted at S.P.H.S. and probably at SRHS 15, when it is built will come from areas OUTSIDE San Pedro.
In April, 2008 and according to records from the Attendance Office at San Pedro High School, most non-phys. ed. classes were conducted in classrooms at the campus and had approximately 40 students per class.
There were exceptions to those averages for students in specialized classes set aside for under performing students, but the average number of students per classroom stood at 40 per room.
No official within L.A.U.S.D. claims that "classroom" overcrowding at S.P.H.S. will be lowered when SRHS is completed and students move from the main campus to the annex.
In truth and fact, the number of students at classrooms at the annex would approximate the number of students in classrooms at the main campus.
So, the average of students per classroom at both the main campus and the annex would be about the same, Approximately 40 students per regular classroom.
L.A.U.S.D. now has almost every approval needed to construct "30 Classroom" at the annex site.
L.A.U.S.D. now has almost every approval needed to construct an "810" seat campus on the Upper Reservation of Fort MacArthur.
Counting time. "810 seats" in a "30 Classroom" setting equals exactly 27 seats per classroom.
The average number of students in non-phys. ed. settings at S.P.H.S. was proved to be 40 students per classroom.
I feel just about everyone can believe that "27" is not equal to "40".
Since the average number of students per classroom won't change at either the main campus OR the annex, the real number of students attending classes at the annex will be approximately 40 students per any of the 30 classrooms.
In other terms, the approximate number of students attending classes at the annex will be '1,200' instead of the "810 seats" approved of by the Board of Education.
Since the annex is currently being planned to have the Marine Sciences Magnet Program and the Police Academy Magnet Program, it is reasonable to believe that the majority of students attending those two programs will NOT be San Pedro residents.
Already, L.A.U.S.D. has acknowledged that the annex would eventually be filled to capacity (whatever that really may end up being) using both Magnet students and regular students.
For the regular San Pedro residents/students, this also sets up the "haves" and "have nots" notion where regular students might be able to attend the new annex while so many other regular students remain attending the main campus.
M Richards

Buena Park, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jan 8, 2009
 

Judged:

2

1

1

With my acknowledgement that approvals have been granted for the construction of the new annex, now many of the problems that will be encountered need to come to light.
L.A.U.S.D. now approves the construction of SRHS 15.
However, there is nothing L.A.U.S.D. has done to believe that plans for the use of that new annex will not change prior to its completion.
Anything and everything we have all be told to be the truth concerning the new annex should not be written in stone.
First it was going to be a Magnet site. Ms. Linda Del Cueto, the Local Area Superintendent, stated that is would be a school intended for San Pedro residents only BEFORE she backtracked on that and stated it would be for Magnet students' uses.
Dr. Richard Vladovic stated in public that the new annex would be for "San Pedro" and not for students coming into San Pedro from other communities.
He subsequently voted to approve plans for the annex to be constructed using language that provided that the Magnet Programs currently be conducted at the main campus, would be moved to the annex.
Since I have a large amount of documentation on the South Region High School No. 15 Project, I feel I know more facts than most residents of OUR community and I would gladly be willing to discuss the project with anyone and provide whatever documentation anyone would like to prove that L.A.U.S.D. will bend approvals, change plans, and do things just to get the new annex constructed.

Also Mr. Mavar, L.A.U.S.D. continues to have "on the books" mothballed plans to build a now-810 seat senior high school campus on "approximately 6-8 acres" of land within the Ponte Vista at San Pedro Project site.
Language contained in the Proposition Q, Seven Billion Dollar Bond measure passed by voters included South Region High School No. 14 as being one of the proposals that may go forward now that the money has been approved of by voters.
As I remember, you, being a member of the Board of Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council, were firmly against SRHS 14 being placed at Ponte Vista even when it was proposed to be a 2,025-seat campus.
It seems Mr. Mavar, you like when senior high schools campuses are built outside your area of concern within San Pedro.
A City Council candidate needs to be concerned about all areas within the particular District they are running in, or do you disagree with that?
This post is not necessarily created to slam Mr. Mavar who has done great works for San Pedro. It is created to provide some real facts that some in the San Pedro community don't seem to really care about.
GO GREEN

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jan 8, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The fundamental issue is community building and the only question is why can't "WE THE PEOPLE" have any say in the quality of life we share!??

If this community served this community, bussing in from other communities would stop and our local schools could once again serve our own children's needs, test scores could rise, streets might even become safer and cleaner.

I bought my house, I work the soil, I pay my taxes, I shop locally, my friends and my children's friends are here, and together we watch bills soar and city services dwindle; The cost of living rises faster than the value of our homes fall. The more we give LAUSD the shittier our schools become. The more money we give to public transportation, the longer our children have to wait and wait and wait for DASH. If LAUSD really thinks the public transportation system will simply deliver and then magically sweep away over 1,000 people then I'd call them stupid. If they pretend a thousand cars and busses speeding through our streets each day won't impact our lives, then they are lying rats!

From our backyards, we don't see LAUSD, we see signs protesting SP15. If "we" oppose this and "they"( including weasels Al Padilla, Dr. Vlad, and John Mavar) don't listen then:
IT'S CLEAR WE ARE JUST NOT MAKING ENOUGH NOISE!!!!!
tired of rhetoric

San Pedro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jan 8, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

Dear M Richards:

Please SHUT UP!!!!!
taxpayer

Chatsworth, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jan 8, 2009
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Does anyone out there understand the State has a budget problem? We shouldn't be starting any new projects until this problem is solved.

“cracker-barrel philosopher”

Since: Jan 08

Wilmington/Carson/San Pedro

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jan 8, 2009
 

Judged:

1

1

GO GREEN wrote:
The fundamental issue is community building and the only question is why can't "WE THE PEOPLE" have any say in the quality of life we share!??
If this community served this community, bussing in from other communities would stop and our local schools could once again serve our own children's needs, test scores could rise, streets might even become safer and cleaner.
I bought my house, I work the soil, I pay my taxes, I shop locally, my friends and my children's friends are here, and together we watch bills soar and city services dwindle; The cost of living rises faster than the value of our homes fall. The more we give LAUSD the shittier our schools become. The more money we give to public transportation, the longer our children have to wait and wait and wait for DASH. If LAUSD really thinks the public transportation system will simply deliver and then magically sweep away over 1,000 people then I'd call them stupid. If they pretend a thousand cars and busses speeding through our streets each day won't impact our lives, then they are lying rats!
From our backyards, we don't see LAUSD, we see signs protesting SP15. If "we" oppose this and "they"( including weasels Al Padilla, Dr. Vlad, and John Mavar) don't listen then:
IT'S CLEAR WE ARE JUST NOT MAKING ENOUGH NOISE!!!!!
Thank you for representing what seems to be the typical opponent to this project.
YourDanaPromDate sMom

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jan 8, 2009
 
john mavar wrote:
By the way, I am Vice President of the NWSPNC. I am here elected to help solve problems.
Please ignore the statistical jargon of M Richards! It appears he has found a new target (you) to criticize since the Bisno thing is on the down-low.
He seeks to denounce those whose opinions differ from his, and then he tends to bore the rest of us with his "numbers". Next he'll be telling you how many people were at SPHS when he attended, like that has anything to do with this. And it will go on....blah, blah, blah.
He's simply a bore enamored by his secret trove of facts, and his whole life is centered around internet posts.
You've got my vote!!
sploco

San Pedro, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jan 9, 2009
 
Mavaar for Mayor!!(of pedro)
Im with Mavar

Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jan 9, 2009
 
Thank you
big sp boss

Los Angeles, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jan 10, 2009
 
gotta love this town

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of32
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••

Manhattan Beach News Video

•••
•••

Manhattan Beach Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Manhattan Beach People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Manhattan Beach News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Manhattan Beach
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••