NON-PROFIT ORG
Palo Alto Unified School District Henry M. Gunn High School 780 Arastradero Rd Palo Alto, CA 94306
Senior Amber Fu reviews food on Instagram.
U.S. Postage
PA I D
Permit #44 Palo Alto, Calif.
PG. 8 FEATURES
THEORACLE Henry M. Gunn High School
http://gunnoracle.com/
Monday, October 8, 2018 Volume 56, Issue 2
780 Arastradero Road, Palo Alto, CA 94306
COMMUNITY RALLIES AROUND LOCAL RESIDENT’S TESTIMONY AGAINST KAVANAUGH
The communit y gathers on Sept. 27 to support Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
Ryan Li
News editor
Members of the community gathered three times in the last two weeks to show their support for Palo Alto resident Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who came forward and accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault. Palo Altans held a candlelight vigil at the Town and Country Village on Sept. 22, a protest at City Hall on Sept. 27 and a third demonstration at the intersection between Embarcadero Road and El Camino Real on Oct 4. Ford, a professor at Palo Alto University, testified on Thursday, Sept. 27 in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee alleging that Kavanaugh assaulted her when they were both teenagers. Since then, another woman has come out to accuse Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. Kavanaugh, an appellate judge who was nominated for a seat on the Supreme Court this July, denied the accusations in testimony. Since then, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has launched and completed an investigation into the allegations. Vigil organizer Vicky Blaine Mattson says 900 people gathered in solidarity with Dr. Ford. “There were hundreds of people at the event, and it was really great to see so many men and women come out in support of Christine,” she said. Junior Sylvana Domokos, who took part in the event, feels that it was powerful to see members of the community support Dr. Ford. “It was really quite incredible to see so many people supporting women and their stories,” she said. “There really was a big collection of so many different types of people of different ages. It was really just wonderful to see the support.” According to Domokos, keeping those in power accountable is important in the current political environment. “I just really hope that the American people and government take into full account the people who are going to be governing us,” she said. “While someone may be an extremely competent judge or lawyer, can we truly accept that they are competent without judging their character?” Ford—p.2
Photo courtesy of Sophie Alexis
School board’s ‘two-meeting’ bylaw now under consideration Joshua Yang Forum editor
As the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) School Board elections approach, the future of a rule requiring all agenda items to be debated on for at least two meetings is uncertain. Currently, the board may choose to waive the rule with a two-thirds majority in regard to routine agenda items. During recent meetings, however, the board has taken to waiving the two-meeting rule for more than just routine agenda items, according to School Board Representative senior Arjun Prabhakar. “In past years, [the board waived this rule] only once or twice per meeting, maybe even less—it would be really rare,” he said. “This year, they are waiving it on maybe at least three or four agenda items per meeting.” In fact, an agenda from the Sept. 4 board meeting records the board recommending the waiving of the rule no fewer than six times on non-routine items. Community and board opinion is divided concerning the future of the policy. School Board Vice President Jennifer DiBrienza believes the two-meeting rule is essential to community participation. “The intention [of the two-meeting rule] is to make sure that we allow for broad community input,” she said. DiBrienza also pointed out how the two-meeting rule allows for greater community awareness of issues. “I know that
very often before I was on the board, I wouldn’t know an issue was coming before the board until they discussed it at the first meeting,” she said. However, School Board President Ken Dauber believes the board should completely discard the rule in order to increase efficiency. “I would like us to move away from the two-meeting rule and instead talk about things more than once only when it’s productive to do that, rather than being required to,” he said. “I would like to change the two-meeting rule because I think it’s inefficient and unnecessary.” Given the proximity of the school board elections, school board candidates have also weighed in on the issue. PAUSD school board candidate Kathy Jordan has been an advocate for preserving the rule, citing greater community engagement. “Giving the public an opportunity to participate and engage with a public entity is more important than waiving the two-meeting rule for efficiency,” she said. “The public has a right to be involved.” Candidate Shounak Dharap follows Jordan’s philosophy regarding the policy. According to Dharap, the policy also benefits board members. “Between the first and the second meeting, that time gives board members the time to really dwell on an issue: to really grapple with all the perspectives, to get into the details and come up with a thoughtful solution,” he said. “Just thinking on your own is not enough to do that, because you need to have someone who’s going to challenge
your assumptions and bring a new perspective to the table. If we were to decide on controversial issues the first meeting, board members would have no opportunity to actually really absorb and think on them.” Candidate Stacey Ashlund expressed her support for the two-meeting rule as well. “The reason I continue supporting [the rule] is because it is in the best interests of the public to be informed, and also in the best interest of the board members to work collaboratively,” she said. The two-meeting rule has long been part of the PAUSD policy; in fact, according to Dauber, a board member from the '90s could not remember when the rule was voted in. The rule, which is a section of Board Bylaw 9323, was intended to give community members more time to participate in discussions. “The goal is to maximize the ability of members of the public to comment on the issue,” Prabhakar said. “If there are several meetings or several weeks that community members have to read through agendas [or] documents [and] make more educated comments on an issue, that would not only give the board more community feedback at meetings, but also make sure that opinions are well-informed and rooted in fact.” There have been mixed opinions about the appropriate times to waive an agenda item as well. Prabhakar hopes the board will move towards waiving the two-meeting rule sparingly. Rule—p.3