Letter: Where were challenges to Cardiff ‘park’ incursions before?
October 8, 2020
As a former Cardiff student/25-year Cardiff teacher, I find it hard to continue to stay silent about the ongoing lawsuits against Cardiff School by a small handful of neighbors.
I’m curious where the people behind Save the Park were almost 20 years ago, when the Science Lab and student bathrooms were installed within the “park” boundary. But then again, those changes to the “park” didn’t affect the views of some neighbors.
Although I hated to see my childhood school campus change, those who care know that the classrooms were outdated, the windows didn’t open, there was no AC, the roofs leaked, and while before the 1990s, having the public walk through campus on Election Day may have provided an opportunity for a lesson in civics, in the generation of routine school lockdown drills, that has felt much more dangerous in recent years.
I am sure that my childhood principal, Mr. Berkich, would have wanted the students of Cardiff to have the best education possible, in perpetuity. But in the 21st century he wouldn’t expect them to be learning on Apple IIe’s with worksheets printed on ditto machines or dot matrix printers.
It’s unimaginable that a group of neighbors would settle a lawsuit with a school district and accept a half-million dollars just to turn around three weeks later to sue again!
When the needs of our community evolve to the point that the letter of the law and the spirit of the law no longer are one in the same, it forces us to ask what is morally right? Should the students and families of Cardiff have safe access to student drop-off, pick-up, and parking? Should they have a playground that can be safely accessed and supervised? Should they have a school auditorium that can accommodate the entire student body safely? Or should they get to keep the exact playground that was dedicated to honor a principal several generations before them?
Save the Park, please look beyond your view. Drop the lawsuit and stop punishing current and future students, their families, the teachers and staff, the taxpayers, and the community as a whole for something that none of them had any control over.
Christa Stone
Cardiff School kindergarten teacher
Sept. 12, 2020
The North Coast Current welcomes Letters to the Editor. Letters must include the author’s full name, mailing address, phone number and email address. Submission of a letter is not a guarantee of publication online or in print. Letters must be no longer than 300 words. The North Coast Current reserves the right to edit letters for brevity and news style. Letters containing threats, potentially libelous statements or solely advertising will be rejected. Email letters to letters[at]northcoastcurrent.com. If you would like to submit a longer commentary, please email the North Coast Current at info[at]northcoastcurrent.com.
cardiff current, encinitas current
Thanks Christa for a voice of reason.
Anybody that follows this issue knows it is not about a park. But fleecing the public by lawyers that can sue with such an excuse when it is obviously about their selfish own views.
If there were honest with integrity they would have mentioned the park in the years of planning in public forums.
I’d like a clear picture. I’m not trying to make a point but trying to understand.
Can anyone explain how the construction on the park, on the west side of the property, impact views? I’ve gone there and looked. I’m not able to get the view thing.
It appears that the plaintiffs live on the east side of the school. Aren’t there a lot of school buildings, in place on school property, that block views… and stand between the plaintiffs and the contested construction?
How visible is the contested construction and what view is it actually obstructing? Can someone suggest where to look?
By Ms. Stone’s logic, failure to arrest someone who gets away with shoplifting one time gives the thief a free ticket for all future shoplifting efforts. Someone who speeds once and doesn’t get caught is immune from future speeding tickets. That’s not the way laws work.
The School District requested and willingly accepted hundreds of thousands in funding under a federal program in exchange for dedicating the park to the public — FOREVER. Why is that concept so hard to grasp?
A brochure published by the National Park Service about the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) explains that “The Fund’s most important tool for ensuring long-term stewardship is its “conversion protection” requirement… [which] strongly discourages casual discards and conversions of state and local park and recreation facilities to other uses.” Those are the rules the district agreed to in writing. The district was required to keep the agreement with its property records — they failed. They were reminded of the LWCF restrictions one month before they signed a $1.37M contract with the architect to design the project and 16 months before construction began. The district got some really bad advice and believed they could talk their way out of compliance with federal laws instead of changing their design to avoid the violation. Why keep blaming the messenger when they chose to ignore the message?
This dispute is not, and has never been, about views. That is a lie perpetuated by the district to provoke anger and deflect from their own bad choices. My own view, and that of my neighbors, has increased immensely since so many trees at the school were cut down. This dispute is about laws, it’s about promises, and it’s about keeping your word to the same public that funds your existence. It’s also being a good example to children — that rules and laws can’t be ignored just because they’re inconvenient, and that your promises can be trusted for longer than until the next shiny thing comes along.