Despite the hopes for a Gilroy strip club expressed last week, it seems Gilroyans hoping to observe topless women (and tip them for the priviledge) will continue having to leave South County in order to do so.  According to the Gilroy Dispatch-

Ante Bilic ended the controversy before it could really begin this morning by withdrawing his application to turn a Mexican restaurant into a strip club, according to the city’s planning department.Planning Division Manager Bill Faus received a phone call from the applicant this morning and said he awaited a formal written statement from Bilic to make the withdrawal official.

It seemed like a no-brainer for Bilic after lawyers for Home Depot – which leases the strip mall at 8800 San Ysidro Ave. north of the Gilroy Premium Outlets – sent city planners copies of a 1999 declaration that bars “adult entertainment facilities” on the premises. Credit Suisse filed the so-called declaration of conditions, covenants and restriction before it developed the property.

When I first read the headline I was all geared up to write another rant about how the government needs to get out of the morality business, but then I read deeper into the article.  Unfortunately, my moral code insists that I support Home Depot and Credit Suisse in this case.  It is exactly these sorts of “declaration of conditions” or “covenants” that I’d like to see used more often, though in lieu of zoning regulations rather than in addition to them.

I completely agree that a property owner has the right to determine what types of activities are undertaken on thier property and in this case they set about doing just that.  The only “guilty” party in this case seems to be the owner of the Los Amigos restaurant who agreed to the covenant when purchasing the property but didn’t disclose it to Ante Bilic.

Related posts

• Gilroy To Reject More Money, More Jobs, More Boobs? (1)
• Why Does Cynthia Walker Hate The Poor? (1)
• Thank God Gilroy’s Graffiti Is Now Safe From Bandits! (1)
• Gilroy’s Graffiti May Finally be Safe After All! (0)
• Breakfast Review: Stubby’s Bar & Grill – First St. (0)

It seems the city of Gilroy is all set to find a way to reject Ante Bilic’s proposal to turn the floundering El Amigo Restaurant on San Ysidro Ave into a topless bar that would not only generate cash for the city, but also produce jobs for young women here in town.  As it is many men drive up to San Jose and Sunnyvale to go to strip clubs on a regular basis.  This means their spending money at gas stations and other businesses along the way as well when Gilroy could be collecting some of that tax revenue.  Not to mention that women from the South County area are already traveling up to those very same clubs to work – also spending more of their earnings in those towns rather than here at home.

Although the Gilroy Dispatch poll is currently running 2-to-1 against allowing the club to open, the comments show the exact opposite sentiment with only a few dissenters taking the time to voice their objections. Most of the objections seem to be unfounded since the club’s proposed site is in an area of town that is already zoned for “Adult Businesses” (ie. not located near schools, parks, religious institutions, etc.). They simply seem to be concerned about the possible increase in crime and/or traffic in the area.

None of the objections seem to be over the increased number of women getting boob jobs in order to better profit at the club. Personally, I think this is a wonderful sign of growth amongst my small town neighbors. Perhaps it’s a result of such classy and professional businesses as Mya Cosmetic Surgery. Maybe it’s the common acceptance of plastic surgery by celebrities – Nikki Grahame had Mya Cosmetic perform her mother’s face lift, then they shared the details with Now Magazine for the whole world to read. Or maybe it’s the fact that many, many more women are having breast augmentation themselves these days. Regardless, it’s nice to see that objection essentially cleared from the debate.

Now if we could just do something about the moralists, the NIMBYs, and those who simply don’t understand how real world economics function to see the light we might actually be on our way towrds freedom and the prosperity it always brings.

Related posts

• No Strip Club For Gilroy :( (0)
• Gilroy’s Graffiti May Finally be Safe After All! (0)
• Why Does Cynthia Walker Hate The Poor? (1)
• Thank God Gilroy’s Graffiti Is Now Safe From Bandits! (1)
• Post LASIK Eye Surgery Care IS Available In Gilroy! (4)

Last September I wrote an article titled Thank God Gilroy’s Graffiti Is Now Safe From Bandits! It turned out the Gilroy Dispatch headline was misleading and they’d actually arrested a griaffiti practitioner, not a graffiti “bandit” (aka: one who steals). The ‘hero’ of that story was Gilroy Community Service Officer Angela Locke-Paddon whose tireless efforts had led to Gilroy doubling their number of graffiti arrests in 2008.

Well, budget cuts have finally made Gilroy safe for graffiti after all.  According to this week’s Gilroy Dispatch-

Just when the Gilroy Police Department was making significant inroads toward controlling Gilroy’s growing graffiti problem, the heart and soul of the anti-graffiti program has been scheduled to be laid off in a recent round of budget cuts.

Community Service Officer Angela Locke-Paddon and Nicole Nielsen, office assistant for the Neighborhood Resource Unit, along with a group of graffiti “Wipe-Out” volunteers were Gilroy’s front against the unsightly scrawls. But after this month, the two women’s part-time duties will be handed off to one of the department’s community service officers.

Take particular notice of the part of the first sentence I emphasized above.  According to the police and the newspaper, Gilroy has more graffiti, not less, despite almost doubling the number of arrests.  In other words, the current abatement system isn’t working!  How about we try something other than more arrests and trials?

As I wrote i nmy previous post, I’m not a fan of tagging (the mostly illegible scrawls that appear all over the place), though I am a fan of spray paint art in public spaces.  But my excitement over these lay offs actually has very little to do with graffiti.  Rather I’m pleased by the overall savings these layoffs represent.  It’s not just the two part time salaries, but also all of the resources that are wasted with every arrest: booking, jailing, court costs, etc.

Should someone be caught vandalizing private property the victim has recourse in civil court.  No police resources required.  As for public property, aren’t taggers and graffiti artists part of the public?  If they want graffiti up they should be free to put it up.  If you don’t want it there, you should be free to cover it or remove it.  No police resources required.

Related posts

• Thank God Gilroy’s Graffiti Is Now Safe From Bandits! (1)
• Gilroy To Reject More Money, More Jobs, More Boobs? (1)
• Why Does Cynthia Walker Hate The Poor? (1)
• No Strip Club For Gilroy :( (0)
• Hello Gilroy! (0)

Does that look like the face of a bigot? Because it clearly is. Unfortunately, she’s a bigot with a weekly column in the Gilroy Dispatch-

Cynthia Anne Walker is a homeschooling mother of three and former engineer. She is a published independent author. Her column is published in The Dispatch every Friday.

She also hates the poor. Don’t believe me? Well, check out these two quotes from her most recent column, So we want even cheaper housing, so we can attract more criminals?-

We have more criminals because we have cheaper housing.
[...]
Unfortunately, these same poor do not recycle and tend to litter.

I’ve been poor my entire life, and a criminal during part of my life (though I only moved to the cheaper South County after going straight). I also don’t recycle (because I know it’s not economically feasible yet)  or litter (because I think it’s simply ugly and lazy). But I’m curious where Ms. Walker is getting any research to back up these attacks on an entire class of people who just happen to make up a very large portion of the population in her chosen home town.

I also wonder if Ms. Walker has never heard of “white collar crime”? Not to mention that, according to the 1986 book The Black Youth Employment Crisis by Richard Barry Freeman and Harry J. Holzer-

Respondents who engaged in crime had higher overall earnings (criminal income plus legitimate earnings), than noncriminals with a gap of roughly $1,000 or about one-third of the average income of the whole sample.

And that’s just one quick citation brought up by a Google search. I recommend that Ms. Walker do a lot more research into the subjects of poverty and crime before continuing to educate her children to continue her hatred towards those who earn less than she does. I also encourage the Gilroy Dispatch to reconsider its funding of hatred towards so much of its audience.

Related posts

• Thank God Gilroy’s Graffiti Is Now Safe From Bandits! (1)
• No Strip Club For Gilroy :( (0)
• Gilroy’s Graffiti May Finally be Safe After All! (0)
• Gilroy To Reject More Money, More Jobs, More Boobs? (1)
• You Call This A Science Fair?!? (0)

While heading down Monterey this afternoon on my way to pick Zaira up from school I came across the scene pictured at left. Apparently two cars got to know each other a little too well, so half a dozen Gilroy Police Officers and a couple of tow trucks came out to secure the area.

It didn’t appear to me that anyone was hurt (no ambulances, several “citizens” wandering around), though the cars did look rather worse for wear and there was plenty of glass in the intersection as my fellow travelers and I were detoured onto Farrell.

I didn’t see the accident and the police were not in the mood to talk, so I don’t have any real details, but I did manage to grab these pictures, So I thought I’d share them with y’all.  Based on the damage doe to the cars and the location of the debris I would guess a left turn gone very, very wrong.

If you have any further details, sharing them in this post’s comments would be appreciated.

Related posts

• Three Of A Kind Comedy Tour Comes To Gilroy (0)
• Thank God Gilroy’s Graffiti Is Now Safe From Bandits! (1)
• Impalas Central Coast Car Club Toy Drive & Car Show (5)
• Gilroy’s Graffiti May Finally be Safe After All! (0)
• Cajun Catfish Fry in Gourmet Alley (3)

Personally, I’m an agnostic.  However, my daughter has chosen to attend services at Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Gilroy.  Her mother is a pagan/Wiccan.  I’ve never mentioned these issues before because they aren’t really relevant.  However, I believe it becomes relevant when an instructor at South Valley Middle School (in this case, the choir teacher Ms. Carol McDonald) starts informing her students that their religions are “fake”.  Is this really what you want done with your tax dollars?

Here’s the scenario…

Ms. McDonald was discussing the upcoming election and, specifically, California’s Proposition 8, which is an initiative Constitutional amendment that “Eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry“. Personally, I have no problem with teachers discussing politics in the classroom, or even their own political views.  Apparently, Ms. McDonald will be voting for this Constitutional amendment.   All well and good.  When asked why, she informed the choir that homosexual marriage was disallowed in the bible.  First, this statement is is simply incorrect – the bible does not address the issue of gay marriage.  The Old Testament does speak against gay sex, but I don’t believe gay marriage itself is prohibited.  If I’m wrong, feel free to comment with the verse(s) that prohibit the practice.  Still, I’m not concerned with Ms. McDonald sharing her personal religious views with her students, though I know many parents would be.  No, my problem is just about to rear its ugly head.  Back to the conversation…

When Zaira informed Ms. McDonald that her church, the Lutheran Church, allows gay marriage, Ms. McDonald replied that Lutheranism is a “fake religion.”  Excuse me?  Who, exactly is a choir teacher to declare, to a student, that the student’s personal religious beliefs are fake?  Just because Ms. McDonald apparently feels there should be a state mandated religion does not mean that we are operating under one at the moment.

I’m curious what other South Valley Middle School parents (or just the general populous at large) thinks about their children being indoctrinated with religion at public schools and with taxpayer expense.  Ms. McDonald has previously informed the choir that paganism is also a “fake” religion and one can only assume that Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, and any other number of accepted religions would also be branded as fake should Ms. McDonald have the chance.  I’m not calling for action at this point, but I am curious what others think.  I’m also curious what the Gilroy Unified School District’s Board of Education thinks of this.  Comments would be greatly appreciated.

Related posts

• You Call This A Science Fair?!? (0)
• Victory To The Students! (0)
• URGENT! Action Needed NOW To Save Science Camp! (2)
• Seeking Gilroy Hotspots And Open WiFi Networks (4)
• Save South Valley Middle School Science Camp! (4)

As I reported earlier my daughter Zaira and several of her friends passed petitions around the South Valley Middle School Campus today. I collected those petitions about an hour ago to drop them off at the Gilroy Unified School District offices. We didn’t have time to fully vet the signatures and many were clearly fake or duplicate names (these are middle schoolers we’re talking about here), but the total number of signatures was just over 600! Even if a full third of those are invalid that’s still some 400 signatures (more than half the student body) collected in a single school day without interrupting or skipping a single class. So a big congratulations to all of the students at South Valley Middle School! You guys did a great job!

The truly exciting news, however was delivered to us mere minutes after we dropped off the petitions – Mr. Kapaku (SVMS Principal) received an email from the school board late this afternoon granting permission for this year’s crop of 7th graders to make the Yosemite trip as scheduled!   So this is a great victory for the kids on many levels.

PLEASE stop by South Valley Middle School tomorrow (Saturday October 4th) between 8am and 11am to support their Sidewalk Sale.  It is one of the primary fundraisers for the Yosemite trip and one of the ways we can ensure that no child is left behind.  Even if you don’t buy anything, just stop by and congratulate them on their victory!

There will surely be more to this story in the future, but I have long standing weekend plans to which I must attend.  I just wanted to share the victory and thak you all for your calls and emails.  Apparently you can fight City Hall

Related posts

• URGENT! Action Needed NOW To Save Science Camp! (2)
• A Response From The Schoolboard (1)
• 100% of Parents Surveyed Support Yosemite Field Trip! (0)
• Save South Valley Middle School Science Camp! (4)
• South Valley Middle School Tiger Spotted! (0)

Around 11am this morning I finally had the time to compile my own message to the Gilroy Unified School District Board of Education. I received a response from Board member Denise Apuzzo about 90 minutes later.  It is a long response, so I am not going to post it in its entirety at this time.  I’ll leave out the 350 or so words telling me what a great parent she is and which of her kids did and didn’t go to Yosemite or Science Camp as not one iota of that is relevant to the discussion.  Her response does, however, offer a little more insight into the nature of the problem we are facing-

First, let me get a few misconceptions cleared up.  The School Board did not “cancel” this trip.  As a matter of fact, the Board has approved Science Camp (inclusive) for all the sixth graders in the district.  Individual schools are working on how to pay for and accommodate these kids.

You stated that there is no logical reason for taking this Yosemite trip away.  This trip, like all field trips, must be approved by the School Board.

So, they didn’t cancel the trip, they merely refused to approve it.  Semantics can make an interesting debate, but they don’t help with the actual problem.  The problem is that the Board of Education is the only thing preventing the trip to Yosemite from occurring as scheduled.  At no point in the message do I see a denial of this.  Nor do I see any logicla reason for them refusing to grant the necessary permission.  But lets get back to Ms. Apuzzo-

We were unaware of plans for this particular trip because we directed principals last year to plan for these types of trips (exclusive) to occur outside of the regular school year.

First off, how competent can this board be if they were unaware this trip had been scheduled?  Every parent I spoke with this morning was aware of it.  Every student I’ve spoken with has been aware of it.  Information about the trip was given out at the ice cream social before the school year began, at the open house, and was sent home with students.  Funds have been collected over the past six weeks, on campus fund raising has been ongoing for most of the school year, and a Saturday “rummage sale” has been organized and advertised for tomorrow.  And yet, somehow, the Board of Education was unaware of all of this planning?  How does that jibe with part 12 of their stated Philosophy(PDF file)-

A high level of communication, trust, respect and teamwork among Board members and the Superintendent, administration, teachers, and staff contributes to effective decision making.

Where was this high level of communication when the decision was made?  Where was it when all of this planning and promoting was going on?  But then, that’s just nitpicking, so let’s get to the meat of the matter-

There is a difference between Science Camp (which is open to all 6th graders in the district) and the Yosemite trip.  The Yosemite trip, by design, is not open to all students.  The fact that scholarships are available does not address the fact that only 54 students can attend.  This is roughly 25% of the seventh grade class.  If the class were offering this trip during Winter break, February break, Spring Break, or Summer, there would be no problem. I believe that there is no question that field trips are an enriching experience for our students.   However, it is against Ed Code to offer any trip during the regular school session which cannot by design include all students.  Over a year ago, the Board was informed by our legal Counsel that we were violating Ed Code with our policies. Ed code states very clearly that fees cannot be charged for activities that take place within the confines of the academic calendar, for labs and such that are part of an academic class, and for participation in sports, electives, etc…  Fees can only be charged for PE uniforms and to replace books that are damaged or lost.

Last year 6th grade Science Camp was not “open to all 6th graders in the district“.  At least not according to the paperwork that my daughter brought home.  I was told that there were limited spots.  While it’s true that only 54 students can attend the Yosemite trip the open slots only filled in the last few days.  Where is the person claiming they’ve been shut out?  There isn’t one.  Speaking of phantoms…

Where is the section of the Education code that the Yosemite trip violates?  Article 13 of the California Education Code is titled Excursions and Field Trips.  The only part of this code that addresses exclusion of students reads as follows-

 No pupil shall be prevented from making the field trip or excursion because of lack of sufficient funds. To this end, the governing board shall coordinate efforts of community service groups to supply funds for pupils in need of them.

No group shall be authorized to take a field trip or excursion authorized by this section if any pupil who is a member of such an identifiable group will be excluded from participation in the field trip or excursion because of lack of sufficient funds.

{emphasis added}

There’s nothing in there about the entire7th grade class having to be permitted to attend.  It only says students may not be excluded because of lack of sufficient funds.  And no one has!  Ms. Apuzzo also asserts that thetrip would be fine outside of the academic calendar, but again, Section 13 of the education code seems to state something different-

The attendance or participation of a pupil in a field trip or excursion authorized by this section shall be considered attendance for the purpose of crediting attendance for apportionments from the State School Fund in the fiscal year.

If the trip’s not allowed during regularly scheduled school days then why is attendance being credited?

I also can’t seem to find where the “Ed code states very clearly that fees cannot be charged for activities that take place within the confines of the academic calendar.”  But I do see where Section 13 directs the governing board to assist with fund raising to meet fees charged for trips.

Back to Ms. Apuzzo’s response-

Any field trips that take place during the school year must be open to ALL students.  Yosemite is not open to all – the fact is that many low-income students don’t even bother expressing interest in attending events that they know they will not be able to afford.  Many of these kids do not have families that are willing and/or able to help with fundraising.  Here is a scenario to consider: if all 200 students received a scholarship to attend the Yosemite Institute, and came in with checks today, would they all be going?  No, they would not be able to go on the trip because there is a limit on the number of students that Yosemite can accommodate at one time.  How would we decide which kids get to go?

This is the biggest strawman of them all.  The fact of the matter is that all 200 students have not asked to go, only 54 have.  Any student who has expressed a desire has been well-informed (repeatedly no doubt) by Ms. Gallup that the funds would be found.  We cna play the “what if” game all day and all night, but a lot more progress will be made should we deal with the reality of the situation instead of beaurucratic fantasies.

And, finally, we get to the ultimate defense of a undefensible actions: “I’m just doing my job” and finger pointing-

 I made this decision because I take the oath I took when sworn in very seriously.  I don’t just uphold the laws I agree with, or the ones that suit me, I agreed to uphold all the laws of the state.  Our past practice was a flagrant violation of Ed Code.  Our attorney made it very clear to the Board last year that we needed to overhaul our practices. We directed the principals to prepare for this. I don’t know if they just forgot about this, or dropped the ball, or were slow to get the word out.  I am not sure what happened.

Well, the former didn’t hold up in War Tribunals and it won’t hold up for me either.  I’ve been unable to locate a copy of the Board of Education Oath of Office online, but my guess is it has far more to do with honoring the state than with assisting our children in their education.  And let’s not forget that this same oath was in effect when last year’s 7th grade class went to Yosemite.  All that’s changed is one lawyer’s opinion – not the law itself.

And blaming the principals is no excuse either.  The Board of Education is the organization standing in the way, not the principal.  It is the Baord’s duty to oversee activities at the school so these types of things don’t happen.

Ms. Apuzzo concludes her letter as follows-

 I am hoping that the teacher will be able to reschedule this trip to occur when school is not in session so that those 54 students can have this wonderful experience.  I am also hoping that the schools will finally take to heart the directive to start planning this year for next year.

I hope you understand the logic behind this now. Please let me know your thoughts on what our next steps should be.

Ms. Gallup can not reschedule the trip.  It is far too late for that and the Board has been repeatedly made aware of this fact.  As for her final two sentences-

1. Sorry, still don’t see any logic.  Partially because you seem to be citing rules that are nonexistant and would be irrelevant iof they did exist; and partially because the simple fact that something is a law doesn’t make it logical.
2. Your next steps should be the very steps we’ve been asking for all along – approve the trip and inform Ms. Gakllup of that decision as soon as possible.  You might also want to hire new legal counsel and/or try reading the Education code yourselves.  It is (surprisingly) written in fairly plain English.

Related posts

• Victory To The Students! (0)
• URGENT! Action Needed NOW To Save Science Camp! (2)
• 100% of Parents Surveyed Support Yosemite Field Trip! (0)
• Save South Valley Middle School Science Camp! (4)
• South Valley Middle School Tiger Spotted! (0)

With so little time to reach out to the parents and students of Gilroy’s South Valley Middle School about saving the Yosemite Science Camp trip I did what I felt I could.  In addition to posting about it here last night and sending out an email to every teacher and student via School Loop, I headed up to San Jose in the middle of the night and spent more of my own funds on printing up some very simple petitions to collect signatures today.  The petition reads-

 TO: Gilroy Unified School District Board of Education

We, the undersigned, are students of South Valley Middle School.  We strongly urge you to reconsider your recent rules change and allow the 7th grade Science Camp trip to Yosemite National Park (organized by Ms. Gallup and Coach Reynolds) to go forward as originally planned.

All of the students who signed up will be able to attend if you just give your permission.  They have worked hard to overcome all of the other obstacles.  Future trips may be up to further discussion, but please recognize the hard work, effort and hopes that have already gone into preparing for this year’s trip.  Cancelling the trip now would add insult to injury for those who have worked so hard.

It then has a line for the student’s name and their grade.  I changed to first line to read “parents” instead of “students” as well.

Zaira and her friends are gathering student signatures during any and all free time at school today.  I stood in the school driveway this morning during “drop off” time and spoke to a total of 17 parents as well.  Every single one of the parents I spoke with not only voiced their support, but also signed the petition.

Now, 17 signatures (actually 18 including mine) may not seem like very many. After all there are roughly200 seventh graders at South Valley Middle School.  But bear in mind that I was just one person, stopping parents dropping off their kids at school,most likely heading to work themselves.  I had roughly 30 minutes (between 8am and 8:30) to spread the word and collect these signatures.  Given more time and possibly actually sending some information home with the students about this decision would surely generate more feedback from parents.  Remember, in 30 minutes I was only able to speak with 17 parents and every single one of them signed the petition.

Both the parent petition and the student petition will be dropped off at the school district offices this afternoon.  I’m hoping they’re still open around 4:30 because the kids stay at school until 4:00 on Friday afternoons in order to gather recyclables from the campus to help pay for the trip that is being threatened. We CAN still save this trip (and future trips as well), but we need to act quickly.  Please check the Save Science Camp page to find out what else you can do!

Related posts

• Victory To The Students! (0)
• URGENT! Action Needed NOW To Save Science Camp! (2)
• A Response From The Schoolboard (1)
• Save South Valley Middle School Science Camp! (4)
• South Valley Middle School Tiger Spotted! (0)

Z and I just returned from the public meeting of the Gilroy Unified School District Board of Education meeting.  We were there to speak out against a rules change that the Board made behind closed doors and without public comment.  Since the item was not on the agenda the Board would neither discuss the issue with us nor answer any questions.  We were, however allowed to speak and speak we did.  Z and another student spoke; two teachers, Ms. Gallup and Coach Reynolds, spoke; a parent of three former South Valley Middle School students spoke; and I spoke.  We all had the same message, although delivered from varying viewpoints-

To cancel the annual 7th grade science camp at Yosemit National Park on such short notice is not only unfair, but unwise.

There would surely have been more parents, students and teachers present and speaking except that this decision was NEVER publicized.  We were able to attend only because Ms. Gallup called us and informed us of the meeting and the decision around 3:30 this afternoon.  The meeting began at 7pm.  I suppose I’ve skipped some viatl information in my haste to get this message out so allow me to back up for a moment.

The school board has recently re-interpreted an existing district rule in such a way as to remove the possibility of 7th graders attending a weeklong trip to Yosemite this coming February.  the school has been taking part in this annual trip for at leeast a decade now and the current 7th graders have already been working hard and planning for this year’s trip.  The decision to cancel the trip was NOT made because of budget concerns, but due to fear of litigation over the inequality of not every student being allowed to attend.

The fact of the matter, however is that every single student who has expressed a desire to attend will be  allowed to attend.  This is because Ms. Gallup applied for (and recieved) over $6,000 in scholarshis from the Yosemite camp to cover the expenses of kids who finances would otherwise not permit them to attend.  Additionally, several fundraisers have been scheduled and every Friday afternoon (AFTER school) several students volunteer their time togather recyclable materials from around the campus in order to meeet any further budgetary shortfalls.

Ms. Gallup, the students, and the parentshave all banded together to overcome every possible hurdle on this journey to Yosemite.  And now the School Board wants to invalidate all of their hard work simply out of fear of some possible complaint at a later date?  This is absolutely ridiculous.  All they are doing is teaching the kids that their desires and hard work mean nothing.  With dropout rates being the primary concern of this school board one would think that they would be fighting to provide more incentive for kids to stay in school, not take away one of the few remaining activities that kids look forward to.

PLEASE take a few moments and call or email the members of the Gilroy Unified School District Board of Education IMMEDIATELY and let your feelings on this issue be known.  All of their conact information and a sample email (that can be copied and pasted or rewritten in your own words) is available at this page.

Time is of the essence as Ms. Gallup is already being pestered by Yosemite to send in her deopsit money or our slot will be given to another school.  If she does not get the go-ahead from the school board in a matter of days it will be too late.  If she sends in the money and the school board then refuses permission for the students to go the money will not berefunded and families already stretched thin in the current economy will suffer the loss of $100 or more in return for nothing.

You can read my daughter Zaira’s thoughts on her blog post: SAVE SCIENCE CAMP!!!!!!!!!!

UPDATE: Sara Suddes of the Gilroy Dispatch has just published an article about this topic on their website – Middle school teachers, students rally to keep Yosemite trip

Related posts

• Victory To The Students! (0)
• A Response From The Schoolboard (1)
• 100% of Parents Surveyed Support Yosemite Field Trip! (0)
• Save South Valley Middle School Science Camp! (4)
• South Valley Middle School Tiger Spotted! (0)