It is nice to see that the MV Council representative on this LASD task force is making a Lot Of Sense, by making suggestions in a years-long controversy between MV students families, BCS families, and die-hard keep-the-status-quo LASD families.

New thinking is obviously what is needed in the BCS/LASD new school facilities problem. Margret is doing a great job bring up NEW THINKING! LASD staff? " Assistant Superintendent Sandra McGonagle said staff, kids, former students and the community would feel like a big part of the community was lost if the district uprooted the school and moved it."This is the Egan I have known for 50 or 60 years," she said. "I don't think it's as simple as moving it down the road."

Half-century old thinking, by nostalgic LASD staff members, seems to be partially what resulted in the BCS "wars". Time for her and Tom McGovern ("rejected idea outright") to rethink how history develops and 'moves on". Hillsdale LASD campus? It's glad the LA City Council instructed LASD to "move one people" from that half-century old facilities idea also.

I grew up in Los Altos in the Mt. View School District... I was wondering when the name changed from Egan to Eagan...just a misprint, I guess

"She said it could be a solid way to avoid controversy and disruption to the school community while benefiting San Antonio neighborhood residents with open space, a track, a gym and other facilities."

And exactly when is any middle school campus open to the public? This sounds unrealistic in terms of benefit and possibly unsafe, especially considering the proximity to the new Village at San Antonio. Will this school have have enough parking and a designated drop off zone, in order to not disturb traffic?

I assume this is still talking about the site including the old Safeway and the Old Mill Office Center.

This site should be redeveloped as a pedestrian thoroughfare between the Caltrain station and the rest of The Village. Park space and transit-oriented developments are what should be here, not a school. The area needs a school, but this simply is not a good place to put it.

Both of our boys went through Egan and don't feel any attachment to it at all; they do have feelings for LAHS but Egan was too short and too long ago. I agree that all options should be on the table, but even so, I don't like the idea of that valuable new land going to Egan or Bullis...seems like it should be a neighborhood elementary school. I understand the diversity issue but being forced to travel across dangerous El Camino for school stinks, especially for little ones. The school should be close so they can walk or ride to school.

I am a proud Egan Junior High graduate and still reside in the area

AND I COULD CARELESS WHAT HAPPENS TO EGAN OR WHERE IT IS LOCATED!

Please stop with the SILLINESS!

that spelling/wording should have been
Hillview Ave. LASD campus? It's good the LA City Council instructed LASD to 'move on people' from that half-century old facilities idea also.

Abe-Koga talks about "compromise" as far as handing over the Egan campus to Bullis Charter. I am confused by her use of that word.

A compromise consists of two parties giving up something they want in order to reach an agreement that they both can live with going forward. LASD would be handing over a neighborhood school. What, exactly, would Bullis be giving up in this "compromise"? MS. Abe-Koga should point that out because it appear that Bullis gets exactly what they have always wanted (an existing LASD campus ) while giving nothing in return.

If they were willing to give up their right to sue LASD in perpetuity, that might be worth it. Other than that, this so-called compromise is a bad deal for LASD, a bad deal for the kids who attend Egan and a bonanza for BUllis. What it certainly is NOT is a compromise.

First, James Reilly is wrong. The presumption is that a school district would use existing facilities to house a charter school. There is no requirement to build new ones. Proper maintenance is required, but capital maintenance is the same regardless of how the district uses the buildings. It wouldn't cost millions to house BCS in the existing Egan buildings. They're better than where BCS is now, in portable buildings that are not well laid out on a proper amount of land. But they're not perfect, not even for their current usages. The district doesn't have to fix that to use them for the Charter school.

The thing is the district keeps claiming that it is cheaper to build new buildings than to renovate existing campuses. It's hard to argue with that, but it's true they are proposing to build a brand new 81,000 square feet building complex on the new land and use it for the charter school. I think BCS worries that their budget for this is inadequate and they won't really get 81,000 square feet of usable space that functions properly. LASD hasn't shown the best ability to manage construction or plan for land purchases, for example.

OK, so that's the compromise. Egan is 65,000 square feet of a known quantity, but run down and aged. The charter school deserves 80,000 square feet or more of space, but they could use some existing portables to round out what's available in the Egan complex itself now. Portable buildings are much cheaper than new construction, especially if they are already installed.

So the compromise is that the district would be motivated to do a good job on a new Egan complex whereas they could care less about the quality of a building destined for BCS. So Egan would get a brand new specially designed site near to where it is and really close to the homes of 250 or so of its students from Mountain View.

If you look at those traveling the longest to reach Egan, these are kids from Blach Jr High who don't even live in the Egan attendance area. They might switch back to Blach. It seems to make sense to switch these kids from Los Altos High School to Mountain View High School as well, given the imbalance in size between these two schools. They could stay in High School with all the kids they attended elementary school alongside for 7 years, whereas they now travel long distances to get to Egan and then Los Altos High School.

It is a compromise. Another factor is that there is no absolute guarantee that it would include the entire 19 acres at Egan. LASD recently started talking about using 5 acres for a teacher housing project (Nothing to do with BCSm but wouldn't be land for Egan either).

So does @Compromise. [Three Party Talks]

The district makes no sense (or rather talks nonsense) if it does not know that in the state of California estimates on classroom renovation are usually 1/5 of the cost of complete demolition and completely new classroom construction. The last building projects in the LASD used an architect/contractor that used these ratios to keep cost lower while improving LASD facilities.

Egan to BCS, new Egan in NEC is the grand Three Party Compromise. (LASD teacher housing on 'some of' Egan land)

Margaret Makes Sense