Finding a way to structure the outdoor space at Monta Loma Elementary School that satisfies the school district, city and residents may mean looking at more than just the park next to the school, but rather undertaking a broader reimagining of the entire campus.
Mountain View Whisman owns both the school itself and the adjacent parkland, which is some of the only open space in the nearby community. When the school district proposed fencing off the site in 2020 in an effort to improve security, neighbors came out in strong opposition.
The district ultimately reversed course and hired consultant Carducci Associates last year for $481,000 to conduct public outreach and create a proposal for the redesign.
Carducci asked the school board at a Thursday, Feb. 10, meeting to consider expanding the purview of the project to include the whole school site.
"The site could be much more efficient when looked at in a holistic sense, (rather) than trying to fragment it through open space and school-use space," Karly Behncke of Carducci told the board.
School board members generally signaled a willingness to explore a wider scope, including looking at the potential long-term impact of expected housing growth in Mountain View on the school, though no formal vote was taken.
"I think we need to have open minds on how we can try to creatively accomplish this," board member Ellen Wheeler said.
Carducci has been holding an extensive series of meetings to gather feedback from neighbors, parents, students, school staff and city employees.
At Thursday's board meeting, Behncke and Vince Lattanzio gave the board an update on how those meetings have been going. Carducci has held an initial community meeting in December, six focus groups last month (with city staff, school staff, city recreation leagues, seniors, families and neighbors) and two broader community input meetings at the end of January.
Overall, Lattanzio said that participants have stressed the importance of maintaining open green space that is available for unstructured use. Carducci's staff have also identified four groups that haven't been adequately represented in the process thus far: families with preschoolers; children who live in the neighborhood but don't attend Monta Loma; seniors who aren't technologically adept; and the Latino community.
After Lattanzio's presentation, two members of the public addressed the board. Both were skeptical of the current process and the district's willingness to listen to the community.
"I hope you guys think about this carefully and that you try to earn trust back with the neighborhood and the community, because right now I just really have so little faith," one commenter said.
The board members generally supported the idea of looking at Monta Loma's campus broadly, with an eye toward the long term. Trustee Laura Berman, who lives in the Monta Loma neighborhood, said that the board should take into consideration the expected housing development in Mountain View and the likelihood that school boundaries will ultimately need to be changed.
Berman also said she's heard residents' desire for open space and that she understands Monta Loma is a community space where those living in the neighborhood go to relax.
"I'm looking forward to seeing what the input is in the next series of meetings," Berman said.
Board member Chris Chiang, on the other hand, advocated for the board to stop the redesign process entirely. He said he was taken aback by a comment from Lattanzio, who said leaving the site as-is wouldn't be helpful going into the future.
"I actually think that at this moment, to do nothing is the most helpful solution," Chiang said.
That's in line with Chiang's past statements. He was the sole board member to oppose hiring Carducci last year, arguing that there are better ways to address the district's security concerns. On Thursday, he suggested that buying robots to patrol the site would be better than erecting fencing.
Board President Laura Blakely disagreed with the idea of halting the redesign and said she is open to instead expanding it.
"I definitely don't want to stop this process now," Blakely said. "I feel like we've finally made some strides."
The next pair of community input meetings are scheduled for 6 p.m. on Wednesday, Feb. 16, and 10 a.m. on Saturday, Feb. 19. To register, visit mvw.sd/ML.
Comments
Registered user
Monta Loma
on Feb 14, 2022 at 12:43 pm
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2022 at 12:43 pm
The problem of undesired use of the school fields during school hours has been solved by the use of a few signs and 15 plastic cones--but why would that stop MVWSD from spending thousands on consultants? Consultants who, not surprisingly, recommend expanding the scope of their project!
This entire project is a ridiculous waste of money and time and Chris Chang is right -- leave our park alone and end this nonsense.
Registered user
Cuesta Park
on Feb 14, 2022 at 2:50 pm
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2022 at 2:50 pm
Wheeler and Berman + Blakely. Seems a majority WANT TO SPEND more than half a million dollars on these consultants / before there is even a plan.*
I appreciate Trustee Chang's emphasis, on these tax dollar revenues for education, actually going for EDUCATION facilities projects.
* $481,000 + "more" = about or more-than $500,000 = 1/2 million dollars
IMO this is why 'no more tax' groups like Howard Jarvis .... have some backers.
1/2 million dollars, more than enough IT equipment money for two more cycles of Chromebook purchases for the middle school pupils. County Counsel "As identified in the Measure, Projects may include but are not limited to: ...
• Update classroom computers and instructional technology."
Registered user
Martens-Carmelita
on Feb 14, 2022 at 3:02 pm
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2022 at 3:02 pm
MVWSD is very good at taking taxpayer funds but try to get an answer to a simple question from anyone at their HQ and they are just too busy dealing with "keeping staff and students safe" to give a yes or no answer. The whole security fence issue is an ill-conceived boondoggle.
Registered user
Monta Loma
on Feb 14, 2022 at 3:04 pm
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2022 at 3:04 pm
I completely agree with Chris Chiang. There are ways to solve the school's concern about security while leaving the park "as is". I was impressed with the way the person we're working with from Carducci Assoc conducted the neighborhood online meeting I attended. He really listened and heard the input given. I'm sure he's right that there are better ways to structure the entire school and park parcel for more efficient use, but it will cost an enormous amount of money which could be better spent. Especially because there's no need to do it.
Registered user
Waverly Park
on Feb 14, 2022 at 3:07 pm
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2022 at 3:07 pm
The every so steady move to making our schools look like and feel like prisons continues under the watch of this board and superintendent. Seems like the special relationship between the City and MVWSD is fading. Each week a new fence segment is quietly installed to allow people to get used to it before another segment or gate goes up. Instead of tens of thousands of $ on fences, the money could be better spent on EDUCATION. I've decided to vote against any more school bonds or other local public school measures until we have new and better leadership. So sad because we have always supported our public schools.
Registered user
Monta Loma
on Feb 14, 2022 at 3:59 pm
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2022 at 3:59 pm
As others have noted, the current solution - using temporary cones to delineate school boundaries - has been working for over six months now. It preserves the park as is, allows for school use, and does not cost the millions of dollars that the district wants to spend.
Dear trustees: you have already spend over half a million dollars on exploring this issue and a year and half of our precious time.
Please stop!
This benefits nobody except the very developers who are running this feedback process. Please focus on things that you should focus on: our children's education.
Registered user
Monta Loma
on Feb 14, 2022 at 4:25 pm
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2022 at 4:25 pm
Another point that deserves to be made here is the fact that these consultants are being paid enormous fees at the same time that our teachers are out there begging for reduced class sizes and reasonable work accommodations-- and getting shut down by their district. I'd like to hear the trustees justify their spending priorities. I just don't get it.
Registered user
Cuesta Park
on Feb 15, 2022 at 7:00 pm
Registered user
on Feb 15, 2022 at 7:00 pm
$ and cents / I'd agree that School Bond Taxes are often going to the 'neatest' and the 'loudest voiced' projects - rather than what the Priorities of the language of what the Bond Tax Measure 'talked about'. Unfortunately - that is the state of current 'oversight controls'. Everything is made squishy language, and the courts have allowed this. (see comentary over the years by Cal Matters, the CA Public Policy Research Institute, the Legislative Analyst and other authorities).
So - it JUST DEPENDS on citizen pressure; Again, and again and again. At School Board Meetings (Public Comment) and in email letters to all the Trustees (trustees@mvwsd.org). GOOD LUCK, & keep trying.
BTW: Bond Tax revenues cannot / ever be used directly for school teacher class size reduction or 'overtime event pay' (extra 504 or IEP federally mandated meetings with parents/guardians)
U of Washington info site : Web Link
Registered user
Monta Loma
on Feb 17, 2022 at 9:10 pm
Registered user
on Feb 17, 2022 at 9:10 pm
The black pole fencing that was installed at Imai Elementary (formerly Huff Elementary) in Mountain View looks like a prison. It apparently was placed there to protect the children, but it looks like it would be harder now for the children to run and escape if they had to do so. The budget could be put to use in much better ways -- as another post stated above, the district is currently at an impasse with the teacher's union over class size, work hours, etc. -- perhaps dollars could go to solve other problems that the education world faces right now. Please leave Monta Loma park as is.
Registered user
Monta Loma
on Feb 18, 2022 at 1:24 pm
Registered user
on Feb 18, 2022 at 1:24 pm
It's rewarding to see so manypeople agree with me about how well the signs and the stanchions (cones) work as a means of delineating purpose. The neighborhood want to keep access to the park and everything the councilman sadi about it not being neccesary is certainly correct. The amount of money spent on this already is maybe an example of how rich city government thinks it actually is rather than What It Is, which is true of so may other community projects going on about town. Let alone all the development crap. And yes that commenter is corect to say that a fence would only reinforce the "schools are but warehouse-prisons for kids, until they're adults" mentality. But this is a city that wants to ban laughing gas.