[bearishgurl]

Happs, I think if you try the splitter with your TV, your internet connection will be very slow. Cox Essential Internet service is only 3 mbps to (compared to 18 mbps for Preferred svc) and Essential TV service does not include Advanced TV or Hi Def. I’ve worked in several law offices in older SD bldgs which did not have cable. They had DSL internet service which seemed comparable to Cox Preferred Service to me.

I believe AT&T Uverse serves downtown SD, Hillcrest and Golden Hill. They have 2-3 speeds of DSL service to choose from. Bundled with TV, this might be a better bet for you. The thing is, you might have to sign a 6-24 month continuous contract with them to get the best rates. Cox is now requiring a 24-mo (ETF) be paid of $2 or $10 (per remaining month) if the customer gets a bundle of two or more services with a price-lock guarantee and terminates their service before 24 months is up. I just finished negotiating with them yesterday as I will likely not be here for 24 more months and my bill was going to ratchet up again, this time to $48 more per month.

I believe Cox may have 90-day bundles as well and this may be all you need until next year, when you come back and are a *new* customer again (who is eligible to sign up for another bundle) 🙂

Maybe some other Piggs have some good ideas on how to get good internet service without signing a contract. With good internet service and a TV tuner installed in a PCI slot of a desktop computer, you might not really *need* TV service.

Broadband internet service has more doubled in price in SD in the last decade.

Based upon your OP, I don’t think you need to pay Cox or anybody $60+ to come to your residence and set it up. Your surfboard modem will work fine with Cox and Uverse will let you buy or rent a DSL modem if you go with them.

[bearishgurl]

Yes, birmingplumb, after the passage of Prop 13 (1978), CA counties began releasing their mental health patients en masse, some severely so, and provided walk-up windows in a handful of locations for them to present their ID cards and obtain their medications. For example, SD County Psych Hospital at that time severely downsized their scope and mission. This worked fine, as long as the former patient had the presence of mind to keep lining up periodically to refill their prescriptions. Sadly, the rest got lost to the streets.

Being a former bureaucrat myself, I have a few suggestions for you:

Contact the SDRC to find out the procedure you need to go thru to get him the help he needs:

http://sdrc.org/services/services-for-adults/

http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/hhsa/programs/ssp/county_medical_services/

http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/hhsa/facilities/central/central_adult_mental_health_and_vocational_svcs.html

http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/hhsa/facilities/central/southeast_mental_health_center.html

Here are some South County facilities (group homes and adult daycare) which may contract with county programs. I KNOW the participants are kept busy during the day and also go out in groups on the bus quite often because I see them in their well-managed groups.

The first link below states is has 1/3 severe developmentally-disabled residents (doesn’t sound like your son but not sure). They all have limited beds.

http://www.calqualitycare.org/providers/developmentally-disabled/090000139.aspx?cat=2

http://www.grouphomesonline.com/det/casa_nuestra-chula_vista

The Arc of San Diego has three locations:

http://ca.hubbiz.com/chula-vista/mental-retardation-developmentally-disabled-serviceshttp://companies.findthecompany.com/l/19923776/Corte-Maria-Group-Home-Inc-in-Chula-Vista-CA

Perhaps if your could qualify for Medi-Cal, he can get a referral to a public defender (NOT criminal but mental-health atty) who can process a conservatorship for him (based upon his CMH record) and get him admitted into a (hopefully permanent) group home who will keep him on his meds. I know a couple of people who retired from the MH dept of the public defender’s office (1 atty and 1 clerk). I’ll try to get a hold of either or both them this week and find out the procedure for your son to qualify for one.

Maybe he can do all of the above simultaneously to an application for Medi-Cal. I honestly don’t know how well the wheel works anymore due to all the budget cuts in recent years.

http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/hhsa/programs/ssp/medi-cal_program/

He can apply here:

http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/hhsa/facilities/south/south_region_center.html

The first step is that you or another relative needs to bring your son into a family resource center of the HHSA (if they haven’t already done so) and help him make application to CMS or Medi-Cal (preferably Medi-Cal, if he’s qualified). Good luck, birmingplumb.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu][quote=jimmy1977]Update on the situation

We heard back from the selling agent. They told us now the house is a short sell. But they claim the bank is ready to close within 14 days. I don’t trust this anymore – we are going to follow bearishgurl’s advice and jump out as soon as our rate lock expires.[/quote]

Hi Jimmy…. I just sent you a PM. Can you check it ?
Thanks.[/quote]

Hello out there, flu . . . ;-]

Why don’t you come out of the shadows and tell the Piggs how you’ve been doing?

Why the cryptic msg after all these months? Did you finally get your RE license after you posted here a while back that you wanted to pursue one?

Or . . . shilling for someone??

Just wondering . . .

[bearishgurl]

[quote=HLS] . . . Having agents or loan officers that are proactive and anticipate problems and deal with them promptly is what makes the difference.

Letting things sit around for 3-5 days each time and not following up creates delays and causes stress.

An agent encouraging a buyer (who needs a loan)to write an offer and close in 21 days and rushing to lift contingencies is irresponsible IMO.

Dealing with a lender who isn’t on top of conditions can also be full of headaches.
There are often going to be problems and delays but many times they can be minimized or avoided.
This becomes the difference in who you chose to deal with.[/quote]

I wholeheartedly agree, HLS, especially with the emphasized statements.

[bearishgurl]

FSD, that was my thought, too. Really, how much could the 30 fixed MIR rate have changed from 21 or even 30 days ago? And I agree that if it is even up a fraction of a point, that is not enough to kill the deal unless it really isn’t a “deal” to begin with.

I understand how hard it is for leveraged buyers to enter into and stay in a transaction today. But, based on jimmy’s posts here, I feel there is more at play here. He has a really bad agent who didn’t protect his interests when writing an offer and did not vet the sellers well enough before placing it his behalf.

I see a LOT of potential problems for jimmy if he wastes more time in the transaction:

-He could be required to pay “sellers” FY 2012-2013 back taxes plus penalty plus any accrued taxes after the beginning of the new FY, which begins July 1, 2013, in order to consummate the deal;

-He didn’t get the PTR until 15 days after he opened escrow and well after his contingency period expired (inexcusable and implies that sellers had something to hide);

-Seller could refuse to vacate at closing, or worse, vacate the day of closing and leave all their debris while stripping appurtenant items they believe are “theirs” (ie ceiling fans, custom blinds, fireplace enclosure, etc);

-He could be pressured to sign docs by his agent without first getting a comprehensive walk-thru to make sure the property is vacant and intact;

-He could be asked to pay the difference to “sellers'” lender(s) between the what is owed and what the lender will accept to consummate the sale (over and above his accepted-offer price); and,

-A NOD could be filed by a third-party trustee at the 11th hour thereby hosing up the whole transaction while jimmy’s rental gets re-rented because his LL thinks he’s moving.

etc, ETC….

It is possible this listing agent originally listed the property at a higher price trying to test the market to see if his/her “sellers” could get enough to break even and pay the taxes owed. But the minute he/she lowered the price enough to attract jimmy and possibly other bids, he/she should have delisted the property and relisted it as a “short sale” with the new price and stating clearly on the pfl that lender approval was needed. Instead the LA “pretended” that it was a traditional sale all along and required jimmy to post an earnest-money check with his offer … or at the very least, accepted that check from his agent without telling them that the listing was a short sale. “Sellers,” along with their complicit agent, “accepted” jimmy’s terms of a 21-day closing and short contingency-approval window all the while KNOWING they could not possibly perform as lender negotiations for the short payoff had not even begun. Meanwhile, jimmy is scrambling to hold his end up on the deal and “sellers” and their agent are thwarting him every which way by having their “selected” escrow company (“in-house” possibly?) send him another transaction’s escrow instructions TWICE and “sellers” selected title company waits 15 days to send him his preliminary title report. There is absolutely no excuse for that. Meanwhile, jimmy decides to avail himself of the public tax screen and finds out the taxes are delinquent, approaches his agent with the problem and he/she tells him, “It’s okay, there’s plenty of funds in escrow to pay them.”

If jimmy’s agent actually really did select services, than jimmy’s agent is entirely complicit in the failure to disclose to jimmy the condition of the title early on, whether the delays were caused by incompetence of the service providers … or not. Actually, jimmy’s agent could have gotten a “property profile” on the property in just minutes or hours, checked the public tax screen and wrote jimmy’s offer based upon that cursory information provided, which would have protected him much better. In addition, REALIST has some of this information available and if jimmy’s agent was worth their salt, they could have pieced it together and grilled the listing agent before drafting their offer.

I say the behavior and incidents described here in totality reek of gross incompetency and may even rise to the level of fraud … on the part of both sellers and both agents. I feel that, based upon his posts, jimmy is completely justified in telling them all to pack sand, after losing trust in these sordid players. Perhaps there is a way to arbitrate with the listing brokerage to get his appraisal and inspection money back (a few hundred?) or they will agree to pay him these damages up front to prevent him from filing a DRE complaint against them. Unfortunately, he doesn’t appear to have enough damages for it to be worthwhile to sue, and, in any case, needs to find a new agent and put this whole debacle behind him. If he can’t recover his earnest money because it has been commingled, that is a different story and is the prime reason for revocation of broker licenses in CA. But I believe he will be able to.

************************************************

If it weren’t for “lender malaise.” there wouldn’t be a platform on which to perpetrate these shady transactions of multiple overt misrepresentations (based on lies) and hook unsuspecting buyers into them. Delinquent sellers would have had their stuff set out on the street after the trustee auction and the marshal’s office (now sheriff) would have locked them out, as it was in decades past. The market has now picked up sufficiently to go back to the following the law in CA and do away with these moratoriums and extensions which have the effect of allowing even strategically-defaulting sellers to squat into oblivion. A RE transaction is stressful enough, (esp for FTB’s) without complicating it with the unsolvable problems of insolvent “sellers.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=jimmy1977]Hi HLS

We saw a couple of deals with this clause that beat us out when things earlier in the year. Our agent told us this might be a good distinguishing point in our bid.
Hence we put in the 21 day closing.

—
Jimmy[/quote]

jimmy, IMO, your agent did you a HUGE disservice. He/she should have insisted on a preliminary title report within 72 hours of opening escrow if they were too incompetent to check the public tax screen themselves, and, in any case, should have insisted on having the PTR in their hands. You, as a buyer are entitled to this knowledge early on, ESPECIALLY since you agreed to such a short closing window. Had they done that small 45-second task and found out both tax installments weren’t paid for FY 12/13 and a penalty was added, this fact would have alerted them to poll the listing agent mercilessly as to the condition of the mortgages, including seeing proof that the mortgages on it were up to date or threatening to rescind the offer. Any agent and/or broker worth their salt would not have put their buyer in such a precarious position in light of the fact of the multitudes of sellers that have been behind on their payments in recent years.

If it took you three weeks to get the PTR, you likely used the listing agent’s “recommended” title company so that he/she could intercept your report and your contingency approval period would expire without you seeing it. OR the “fix was in” so that your agent couldn’t get the report. OR your agent DID get the report but withheld it from you to buy time, while the two agents tried to put their heads together to figure out how to make this deal go through so they could make their commission.

You don’t really know how long these “sellers” have been squatting without making payments. For all you know, it could have been 6 months (since the first FY 12/13 tax installment was due and they had impounds) to 3 years. You (and likely your incompetent agent) doesn’t know how much of a short pay your seller’s lender(s) are now (at the 11th hour, lol) being asked to take, nor do you know if they will cooperate. IMO, the listing agent in this transaction is completely unethical and also incompetent if they think they’re going to successfully market a property that they KNOW is a short sale without advertising as such. And if they didn’t know it, they should turn in their license right now because they have absolutely NO IDEA what they are doing. Their broker should have advised them (and pounded it into their heads) years ago they they have a duty to let potential buyers know up front that their listing is a “short sale” so they can make an educated decision whether to place an offer or not. Here is a long version of Holmes’ holding but there are several online:

…Holmes v. Summer is a precise example of how the culture of seller dominance and the attendant and deliberate dilatory disclosures have gone awry, rendering the previously acceptable “standard operating procedure” virtually criminal. Certainly the willful withholding of facts, which are necessary for the buyer to determine a fair price and that the property is suitable to be purchased, is reprehensible conduct deserving of suspension or revocation of a license for dishonest conduct.

Holmes v. Summer provides a watershed moment in case law for brokers and their listing agents. Holmes reestablishes proper conduct for listing agents and their brokers regarding the timing of property disclosures (specifically title condition disclosures in the Holmes case). Holmes mandates that all disclosures of material fact about the property, known to either the seller or the listing agent, which might influence any of the buyer’s decisions about purchasing the property must be made to the buyer by the listing agent prior to acceptance of an offer, not after an offer is accepted and escrow is opened, as has become the generally accepted custom amongst brokers and agents today.

Listing agents are on notice: you must now Holmes-proof yourself and your seller in order to mitigate exposure to liability – up front risk reduction – and ensure that you are fully performing both your specific duty to your client as well as your general duty to the buyer.

Buyer’s selling agents beware: the listing agent’s custom is deeply ingrained and you will need to insist on full disclosure prior to preparing and submitting an offer. Market conditions with a dearth of buyers, such as we are currently experiencing, demand selling agents be more vigilant in securing the proper disclosures for their buyer…

http://firsttuesdayjournal.com/holmes-v-summer-dilatory-disclosures-and-the-damage-done/

The listing broker (if competent themselves) is well aware of the perils and brokerage liability of taking a listing of a delinquent homeowner without advertising it on the MLS as a short sale. By not doing so and accepting a buyer deposit and 21-day closing (as in a traditional sale), they are exposing their brokerage to buyer damages. That is why SS listings don’t require earnest money from a buyer whose offer was accepted by “sellers” until it is lender-approved and the buyer is still interested at that time and elects to open escrow. The “sellers” in these cases have no authority to “accept” any offers in reality and in any case, cannot convey clear title to anyone.

I don’t blame you for feeling you’ve been duped because I feel you HAVE, based upon your posts on this thread. These are just the type of “sellers” who would end up stripping the place before they leave and their agent would attempt to close the transaction anyway by not making it available for you to do a final walk thru at the 11th hour.

I’m still astounded by the level of sheer incompetency of RE agents and their broker oversight today … from the sublime to the ridiculous.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=njtosd]BG – you ask whether I’m still in NJ. I indicated earlier in this thread that my son will enter CCA this fall. Apparently not financially secure enough to have time to pay attention to what other people write . . .[/quote]

Okay, I found it now.

[quote=njtosd on June 6, 2013 – 4:41pm.]My son will enter CCA this fall. I have been told (although I have no hard data) that there were a significant number of freshman at Torrey Pines HS who wanted to transfer to CCA for sophomore year (and beyond). So your assumptions may be off -[/quote]

I must have missed something along the way, nj. When did you move back to SD?

[bearishgurl]

[quote=DaCounselor] … As I posted above, the DoE separates API scores and has a line item for socio-economically disadvantaged kids and at LJHigh those kids’ API is much lower than the top groups’. I would like to see your supporting data to the contrary and am also still waiting for your data that shows that the incoming transfer students at the LJ schools are the “cream of the crop”. It would be awesome if you could just provide the data and then I can opt out of this issue – Thanks.[/quote]

DaCounselor, can you first provide me with a link showing what you are discussing here? I don’t quite understand where you are finding this “line item” claiming the incoming transfers score lower on API.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flyer]What’s really sad, IMO, is many of the kids who were raised in San Diego will never be able to find jobs or buy homes here–should they want to. At least that’s what we’ve seen with many of our kid’s friends.[/quote]

flyer, that is why my kid(s) chose to attend college and settle in SF/SV to work and my youngest is now considering doing same. Not only do the jobs there pay much better than those in SD, the are many more career opportunities for young college grads there and it is easier to move up the ladder in the seven-county bay area. The same could be said for certain parts of LA. I DO believe my kids will eventually be able to buy their own flat(s) and believe it will be likely happen thru owner-carryback financing. Right now, “rent control” is serving them just fine and has been for years. Hailing from Alameda County myself, I am more than happy for them 🙂

[bearishgurl]

[quote=all][quote=njtosd]…I would add that bearishgurl has a case of sour grapes that almost borders on hallucination.[/quote]

Show some sympathy – she had to walk through bad neighborhoods in order to be abused by her incompetent bosses for years and ended up in Chula Vista. Agreeing with you would mean accepting that all the sacrifice was for nothing.[/quote]

Actually, craptcha, those weren’t “bad neighborhoods” I had to walk uphill to after work to retrieve my car. It was Banker’s Hill, which was filled with the homeless at the time. However, today, YOU probably couldn’t afford to buy there as its SFRs, although large enough (mixed with multifamily and commercial bldgs), are likely wa-a-a-a-y too expensive for the avg Pigg currently in “family-raising mode.” Might that be your current station in life, craptcha?? If so, carry on with your brethren up north in your crowded subdivision where you can hear your neighbor’s toilets flush.

Oh … and my “sacrifice” (lol) wasn’t all for nothing. I earned a pension out of it as well as a guaranteed healthcare allowance … for life, which I have now begun to collect (thank you very much). AND … I have a large house with a nice lot in an area I didn’t “end up in” but was already highly familiar with and CHOSE to live in, which, depending on whom you ask, could be a step up or step down from those crowded *newer* subdivisions with 3500-4000 sf lots. Oh, and another thing, craptcha … it is ALL MINE, I have about 60% equity in it and am considering retiring the mortgage if I decide to move away next year and keep it. For instance, I don’t have to worry about a co-owner wanting to sell the property out from under me (or forcing a sale or refinance through divorce, partition or whatever), failing to make their portion of the payments and subjecting me to foreclosure, trashing it with their packrat ways or running up utilities and leaving me with the bills. I get to call ALL the shots and there’s a LOT to be said for that in my book.

If this forum is still here in 25 years, craptcha, I want you to personally post here and let everyone know how your life is going and how financially secure you feel. If I’m still around, I’ll pay attn from time to time between ski runs, hikes, off-roading, wine tasting and sitting in hot springs (if I’m still able to do all this, lol). Until then, keep soldiering on that l-o-o-o-ong road before you. It gets easier after you top the crest and make your way down the other side. But since you’re obviously not there yet, you can’t possibly predict what will happen to you between now and then and therefore are not in a position to judge someone who has already been where you are ;=]

[bearishgurl]

Thank you for your RANT, treehugger. I agree with all of it. SD County has enough housing to last thru at least three more boom-and-bust cycles at which time the remaining employers here who have consolidated operations here or elsewhere in the state, country or world will be controlling the few local companies/installations with FT secure jobs.

As I have stated here repeatedly, it is not the job (and shouldn’t be the goal) of those running CA’s coastal cities and counties to approve endless housing permits into oblivion just for the sake of attracting new residents. We don’t need any new residents, and, in any case, if they move here and want to buy a residence, they can shop the resales on offer to them at the time.

CA coastal areas within ~eight miles of the coast were never set up for the young “worker-bee set” to live a luxurious, carefree life of their dreams. They are actually “move up” areas for those who have already paid their dues in life and/or for those who are otherwise financially secure.

As it has always been and should be.

[bearishgurl]

Oh, good L@rd, nj (are you still in NJ?). Unlike you, I have nothing to be “sour” about. My kids graduated and will graduate from the top-scoring or 2nd top-scoring (depending on year) HS in the district. Accordingly, their elem school has scored in the low and mid-900’s since the API scores were published and their middle school was a CA Distinguished School three years in a row.

And …. drumroll … these schools are nowhere near LJ, CV or the PUSD.

See, life goes on in the rest of SD County 🙂

Does any other Pigg have entirely self-supporting kids after graduating from SD County HS’s, going onto college and graduating with a Bachelor’s degree? If so, please post with your “results.”

That IS the bottom line here, right? Isn’t that why local homebuyers in “family-raising mode” have been chasing schools over a suitable home for their family (unemcumbered with MR) for the last 15 or so years?

As for me, I’m financially secure enough to take time to “entertain” y’all on this forum periodically. My last kid will check into college late next summer and I will call it a day and proceed to try out a new locale for “retirement” purposes. My kid is currently in NorCal as I write this touring university campuses with a (now very successful) elder sibling who has managed to “support themselves” in SF for over ten years.

My kids are far apart in age and raising them has been a long road for me. I sincerely hope all of you will have self-supporting kids after obtaining a Bachelor’s Degree with no student debt (or even without a degree).

At this late date, I’m essentially “done,” folks, and never in my life chased after an API score (which weren’t even available until the mid-nineties). The truth is, I didn’t even pay attention to them until I began reading this forum and realized that many young homebuyers were chasing those scores over actual location, lot and house. In coastal CA counties, it is my opinion that this mentality is shortsighted and unwise.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=drboom]My wife taught at Torrey Pines Elementary and was not impressed at all.

Poway schools are better but the reputation is undeserved IMO. If you put stock in test scores, just look at the similar schools rankings for Poway.

http://api.cde.ca.gov/Acnt2011/2010Base_Dst.aspx?allcds=3768296

If you care about your kids’ education and have the means to do something about it you shouldn’t be looking at public schools anyway. If they let teachers teach it might be different …[/quote]

Nice of you to drop in again, drboom 🙂 I DID look at that similar schools rank of schools within the PUSD on the link you provided and observed quite a few very low rankings there. My understanding was that this column ranks student performance in schools with other “similarly situated” schools in the state, perhaps with a group of same-grade schools with similar demographics and similar percentages of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunches.

What is says between the lines is that the students in those PUSD schools which have low API scores in relation to schools statewide where the student body has essentially the same economic opportunities offered to them are not working up to or testing to their capacity given all the tangible benefits at their disposal to assist them.

Go figure. And THIS, after nearly a billion was spent on new schools, rehabbing older schools and building an atrociously expensive monument for a District office. I’ll say it again … not only are PUSD taxpayers not getting their money’s worth, they haven’t even begun to scratch the surface on repayment of the principal in said (subprime) bonds used for all this fabulous new construction (“for the kids”).

[bearishgurl]

I get tired of reading over and over here how a contingent of regular posters laud ONLY I-56 corridor schools and the (heavily indebted) PUSD over all other schools in the county …. as if the other schools/districts didn’t exist and/or weren’t “good enough” for their kids to attend.

It’s all a crock of BS and and I’m happy to report that the UC and CSU doesn’t see it that way.

We’ve even got Piggs posting here from out of state who may not have lived here for years advising other out-of-state incoming posters on the “best schools” in SD County, but undoubtedly some of their kids didn’t even make it out of elementary school before they moved away.

Unlike a poster who has resided in SD County for well over 35 years and in CA for 50 years (describing myself), we’ve got the blind leading the blind here with a bunch of anecdotes describing their (negative?) perception of “disadvantaged kids” being bussed into LJ schools which has been going on long before most of you got here (excepting native San Diegans, of course). We all know that parents don’t make the rules and never will … anywhere in the country. School districts do … in compliance with the HUGE patchwork of state and Federal law controlling them.

Why even discuss the presence of out-of-area students attending a particular school, unless they actually live in MX and are fraudulently “stealing” spots from area-resident students causing them to attend an out-of-area school? (Yes, this DOES happen and in more districts that you might think.) Especially in a large urban district where EVERY school has some. What difference does the presence of out-of-area children in your child’s school make to them? Does their presence lessen the opportunities offered to your child to excel in the same school?

I didn’t think so.

When you are buying into a school “attendance area,” you are buying into *all* the levels of public school within it. And as we all know, only the HS grades (grades 9-11 or 10-11, depending on university system) are averaged together for college admittance. When push comes to shove, a student’s GPA in those 2-3 grades (along with their SAT/ACT scores) are all that matters in the end.

In this case, the OP asked only about TWO particular areas they are interested in where the housing stock is vastly different from one another. One has more custom homes than tracts (some which offer views unmatched anywhere in the world) and the other has almost all tract developments. Comparing these two areas is essentially comparing apples to oranges. By virtue of its location and housing stock, CV is not even in the same league as LJ and never will be.

I currently have a kid enrolled in public HS here and have already gone through all of this (college admissions/getting thru college/college graduation) a time or two :=0

Nazzy, if you haven’t come here personally, driven the streets in your target areas and actually viewed properties, it is difficult to describe how your family’s life would be living in each area. You actually have to see for yourself with your own eyes the differences in housing stock in your two areas as they are great. We also don’t know what you are used to living in (age, lot size, house sf) so don’t know what you would be most comfortable in.

In the two areas you mentioned, I would choose location, lot and house over schools since the schools are comparable at all levels. Whatever schools go with that house, so be it. It is unwise to shop schools over house because you don’t know if in the future an overcrowded school in your attendance area will redirect some resident students to other district schools or redraw school boundaries as they have the right to do. We must be ever mindful that school districts run the show, NOT parents.

[bearishgurl]

btw, folks, Lincoln HS in SD has been COMPLETELY REBUILT in recent years. It’s a helluva lot newer (and undoubtedly more well-equipped) than LJHS.

Just in case ya’ll haven’t have a chance to do a drive-by, I’ll post the pics here.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/1b/Lincoln_High_School,_on_the_intersection_of_Imperial_Ave._and_Willie_James_Jones_Ave.jpg/220px-Lincoln_High_School,_on_the_intersection_of_Imperial_Ave._and_Willie_James_Jones_Ave.jpg&imgrefurl=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_High_School_%28San_Diego%29&h=165&w=220&sz=11&tbnid=b9cFvsz4gXom6M:&tbnh=111&tbnw=148&zoom=1&usg=__7q1qbNZFaEzgUM7EmprJYjgFD9A=&docid=wlOp2YJlCi_iwM&sa=X&ei=CYa1UauIJoWjqwG7zoHIBg&ved=0CC8Q9QEwAA&dur=603

[Author]

Posts