$1.2 billion waterfront redevelopment approved

[formerly really]

slug wrote:

<quoted text>You are living somebody else's fantasy post. Find an area like downtown Pedro with the quality of housing inland that is cheaper. In fact, there are plenty of nice areas with new housing much cheaper inland. There are brand new homes in San Timoteo Canyon near Beaumont with plenty of horse stables, new shopping centers, with bigger properties and bigger houses for under $200,000. Go out to Apple Valley and it gets better than that. The other areas up and down this coast were built later and not anywhere near commercial/industrial property on the scale of LA/LB. Compared to other coastal areas, you'll find higher prices in the other areas. Unless you take ocean view into account. South Shores is not cheaper as you get nearer the coast and that is within the city limits.

That's my whole point- San Pedro is completely backwards. The closer you get to the water, the less expensive the real estate. No other coastal community is like that. It's totally screwed up. In a normal city, the houses closest to the water would be the most expensive but that's not the case here- why? It's not location- it's the other factors, crime and decaying infrastructure. This is the ONLY place where people closest to the ocean live in the bad neighborhood.

[formerly really]

slug wrote:

<quoted text>Read your post. You are stuck on income. Decent people aren't populating the poverty level, by your post. You want to exclude an entire group of people for the actions of a few. I agree that you want decent people and decent people make it harder for the dregs to act and have influence. But, your solution is to clean out the neighborhood based on income (increase property values to replace the neighborhood with above poverty level income earners).
I would like to see the bad element leave, too, direct to prison. Why would I want them to go elsewhere to harm others? The smart person knows the difference between a bad person and a good person. Generalizations drop good people into bad categories and I just don't think you really want to do that. But, it cuts both ways. I have heard cold blooded murderers in Pedro referred to as good people who maybe had a reason for what they did, or should be shown compassion because the rest of the time they are such nice people. Physical harm should never be accepted or tolerated. That should be your message instead of hammering a population that is made up of mostly good people. Make your stand so that others who use descriptions of murderers like I gave above get the message loud and clear.

I never said that there aren't decen't people at low levels of income. I said that the people that need to go are at that level. Your avereage gang banger, despite what he thinks is going to happen, is not pocketing wads of cash and living the high life- he's selling drugs at a subsistence level, using too and is barely making ends meet.

Now, I think it would be great if we rounded up all the criminals in town and put them in jail- but people get mad at me and tell me I'm negative and a complainer when I wasnt the 100 police officers that we are owed by the city of Los Angeles. At our current levels of policing and reduced court hours- do you really think that a criminal purge is in the offing?

There are a number of ways to improve the situation- and one of them is economic and will happen naturally: as housing values go up, the criminal element will get priced out of the market. Slumlords will no linger find it profitable or practical to allow their properties to deteriorate and become havens for criminal activity. Now, does that mean that some good people will have a harder time finding housing/ possibly, but we still have housing assistance programs, and they won't be going away. And since those good people will also be benefiting from the reduced crime and access to better jobs if the economic climate here improves with new business, it's a net gain for good people of all income levels.

[slug]

formerly really wrote:

<quoted text>
That's my whole point- San Pedro is completely backwards. The closer you get to the water, the less expensive the real estate. No other coastal community is like that. It's totally screwed up. In a normal city, the houses closest to the water would be the most expensive but that's not the case here- why? It's not location- it's the other factors, crime and decaying infrastructure. This is the ONLY place where people closest to the ocean live in the bad neighborhood.

FR, you got too excited. I said the statement is false. Compare similar housing. South Shores is more expensive than similar housing inland from there. Even housing is more expensive near the Main Channel than similar housing inland. Don't compare South Shores to housing below Pacific. Two different developments at radically different times in the city's history. Also, the South Shores view is of the channel and the island. Housing below Pacific is of the harbor and exposed to the noise of the commercial activity and the pollution of the port. I've been to other ports where a real working port doesn't have highly desirable housing immediately next to it. Because of the age of this port, it is one of the few places where those two exclusive entities (housing and commercial activity) share a border.

[slug]

formerly really wrote:

<quoted text>
I never said that there aren't decen't people at low levels of income. I said that the people that need to go are at that level. Your avereage gang banger, despite what he thinks is going to happen, is not pocketing wads of cash and living the high life- he's selling drugs at a subsistence level, using too and is barely making ends meet.
Now, I think it would be great if we rounded up all the criminals in town and put them in jail- but people get mad at me and tell me I'm negative and a complainer when I wasnt the 100 police officers that we are owed by the city of Los Angeles. At our current levels of policing and reduced court hours- do you really think that a criminal purge is in the offing?
There are a number of ways to improve the situation- and one of them is economic and will happen naturally: as housing values go up, the criminal element will get priced out of the market. Slumlords will no linger find it profitable or practical to allow their properties to deteriorate and become havens for criminal activity. Now, does that mean that some good people will have a harder time finding housing/ possibly, but we still have housing assistance programs, and they won't be going away. And since those good people will also be benefiting from the reduced crime and access to better jobs if the economic climate here improves with new business, it's a net gain for good people of all income levels.

I went to the meeting at SPHS tonight. Talked to a couple of teachers whom I do not know. Never met them before and don't know their names. It was interesting what they said, though. We were talking about school dropouts. They find the issues in San Pedro unique within the district. Decent incomes on average, yet for those income levels disproportionately high use of drugs out in the open. Parents and family friends, too. They thought much of the problem is attached to the community full of dock workers and other port related jobs. Good money, bad behavior. I would like to disagree about the generalities, but they have intimate knowledge more than I do. I know several longshore families, though, and none of them use drugs, or even drink alcohol in excess - well, almost none. They are good community members who are raising or have raised their kids right. But, there appear to also be enough who have caused the negative stereotype and have contributed to the reasons for high dropout rates and failing academic reports to be unique for the socio-economic group in this community. Other areas with similar sized problems have a high transient immigration population. The thinking is now that a high school education is required to work on the docks, a turnaround on the school issues is beginning.

As for your policing statement, quoting Donald Sutherland, "...always with the negative ways". You can still keep high standards, even with what you got.

[Future]

Speaking of SPHS does anyone know the status of it being on the final LAUSD "failed" list?

When that happens the program can be outsourced to a charter school or whatever.

I love pilot programs like this because there's nowhere to go but up. Who knows you might have a big improvement.

The reason property values in the better parts of VDO aren't as high as on the hill is because to match PVUSD you'd have to send your kids to Mary Star and by then it's cheaper to live in RPV.

[formerly really]

Future wrote:

Speaking of SPHS does anyone know the status of it being on the final LAUSD "failed" list?
When that happens the program can be outsourced to a charter school or whatever.
I love pilot programs like this because there's nowhere to go but up. Who knows you might have a big improvement.
The reason property values in the better parts of VDO aren't as high as on the hill is because to match PVUSD you'd have to send your kids to Mary Star and by then it's cheaper to live in RPV.

They aren't really on the "failed" list.

They have to sumbit an education plan to raise scores and other programs can also submit plans for SPHS in competition. SPHS is one of the schools on the list that is on the competition list. There may or may not be a charter that applies to take over their program with a different plan, but the new principal at SPHS is working on their new plan.

[Future]

The kids that go to Mary Star come from the same town as the kids who go to SPHS.

But MS has much, much better performance. Why is that? MS's better curriculum (copy it), better philosophy towards education (copy), more teachers (??), other?

I understand the Christian part would need to be replaced with something like a social studies program.

How about a class that looks at the social issues right here in town. Plenty of parents would want to help their kids with that kind of homework, right from this forum!

Clean up some of the posts and it could be part of a term paper.

[hate to say it]

Future wrote:

The kids that go to Mary Star come from the same town as the kids who go to SPHS.
But MS has much, much better performance. Why is that? MS's better curriculum (copy it), better philosophy towards education (copy), more teachers (??), other?
I understand the Christian part would need to be replaced with something like a social studies program.
How about a class that looks at the social issues right here in town. Plenty of parents would want to help their kids with that kind of homework, right from this forum!

Clean up some of the posts and it could be part of a term paper.

Your absolutely right. It shouldn't be that hard. Keep in mind that the the kids at MS probably have parents who are more involved with thier kids education as well. This is another key factor to success.
There are actually a number of underlying issues that drag down the public school system in L.A. I would list them but then people would scream racism, classism, and every other ism you can think of. Lets say that having multiple first languages at public schools doesn't lead to proficiency for all. Having kids who have thier primary meal come from the free lunch program isn't good. These are not issues at MS.
P.S. My wife is a teacher and experiences these issues first hand. It's really sad.

[formerly really]

Future wrote:

The kids that go to Mary Star come from the same town as the kids who go to SPHS.
But MS has much, much better performance. Why is that? MS's better curriculum (copy it), better philosophy towards education (copy), more teachers (??), other?
I understand the Christian part would need to be replaced with something like a social studies program.
How about a class that looks at the social issues right here in town. Plenty of parents would want to help their kids with that kind of homework, right from this forum!
Clean up some of the posts and it could be part of a term paper.

Lots of reasons- number one is that parents are more involved with their kids' education at Mary Star. Mary Star also has a much higher percentage of primary English speakers. Poor English affects all subjects and leads to overall poor scores.

SPHS used to have a local history class that was very popular but they dropped it in the budget cuts- a real shame.

[formerly really]

hate to say it wrote:

<quoted text>
Your absolutely right. It shouldn't be that hard. Keep in mind that the the kids at MS probably have parents who are more involved with thier kids education as well. This is another key factor to success.
There are actually a number of underlying issues that drag down the public school system in L.A. I would list them but then people would scream racism, classism, and every other ism you can think of. Lets say that having multiple first languages at public schools doesn't lead to proficiency for all. Having kids who have thier primary meal come from the free lunch program isn't good. These are not issues at MS.
P.S. My wife is a teacher and experiences these issues first hand. It's really sad.

Yes, you'll probably get tagged with an "-ism" but you are right.

It's not racism to say that if you don't speak the language well, you won't understand your other subjects being taught in that language. I'm a fan of immersion. I don't think the years of ESL classes have helped- they just dragged the problem out over a long period of time.

[TLAQUE PAQUE]

formerly really wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, you'll probably get tagged with an "-ism" but you are right.
It's not racism to say that if you don't speak the language well, you won't understand your other subjects being taught in that language. I'm a fan of immersion. I don't think the years of ESL classes have helped- they just dragged the problem out over a long period of time.

RACISTA!!!!

[slug]

TLAQUE PAQUE wrote:

<quoted text>
RACISTA!!!!

Immersion is more effective than ESL. The student wins, not the system.

[Letting People Know]

Here is the problem with SPHS. Like was stated earlier many say the longshore mentality. I would say it is more the new generation of longshore workers who may have had difficulty graduating high school. Their children will see this, and then they think it is easy street. Well the truth of the matter is the jobs on the docks are not as prevalent as they once were due to the increased use of technology on the docks. Now I am not knocking longshore workers at all, my family has had many members who have worked on the docks over the years, but I have seen the mentality of the people working on the docks change.(however, this happens with every job)

Now, back to how this effects SPHS, the students their aim for this goal that they may not achieve since there are fewer jobs on the docks. They do not look to college or further education. With this in mind, they do not put the effort out in school. Add onto this, a constant changing curriculum and ideas that are only around for 1 or 2 years, and then changed for the new flavor of the month. This is the way it is at every school. We have NCLB, which is a failure, and now they want to privatize all of the schools (which harken back to vouchers and Bush a la 1990). Yes, a change is needed, and the new principal has not even been given a shot. As a community, we need to rally around SPHS and help it. We need to find solutions, we need to end the bussing of students from outside of our community. WE ALL NEED TO MAKE SPHS BETTER!