Students Doe Exhibit 50From: Ebby, David A. Sent: ‘Tuesday, November 11, 2008 4:14 PM To: MoGinley, Christopher sti: RE: scenario 8.pdf - Adobe Reader Tunderstand, Thank you. am not copying anyone on this email. We all appreciate how hard you are working ‘on this and the patience and sensitivity that you have shown to the Community and to the Board in dealing with this. I's funny, but I think this difficult situation at the inception of your tenure has been an opportunity for the LMSD Community to come to respect you and become comfortable with you very quickly (of course that will all change in a heartbeat if the Community hates whatever plan we adopt!). A few questions: Under plan 8, the walking zone that is reduced is around LMHS. No other walking zones are affected, And the walking, zone that is reduced is all of §. Ardmore save Susanville, which goes to HH under plan 7. Lam I correct? Itis interesting that the community reps expect a revised plan 7--that confirms my worries that we look like amateurs if we propose yet another new plan. The community is not going to be sympathetic to the fact that this is not a straight line joumey or that the Sunshine law makes the deliberation process very cumbersome~which wwe certainly experienced last night. Also--fyi--1 asked one of my colleagues who knows a bit about Con. Law and she said that the disparate imps ‘cases are not redistricting cases, but rather in the context of rules by government agencies like no beards--which are challenged by Muslim men as being discriminatory because something that is neutral on its face has a detrimental impact on a protected class. So even though I want to try and accommodate S, Ardmore, I think éither plan would pass Constitutional muster. There will not be a class that can say that either plan affects them jn a worse way simply because of their race or religion. ‘Never a dull moment, eh? e.. McGinley, Christopher {mailto:McGinleyC@lmsd.org) ‘Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 3:59 PH To: Ebby, David A. Subject: RE: scenario Bip - Adobe Reader David, Tam responding to your questions rather than sending a reply to all as | do not wish to create online deliberation on this issue. fam meeting with Ross in the morning to look at options surrounding SH8. This plan is a departure from the Community value of walking and the administration was following that value in the development of prior plans. The Board non-negotiable of two high schools of equal size is not achieved under this plan as the populations will not be balanced. The allowance for an imbalance was not established until the Board and the administration worked to explore Options. The loudest ery for ak-12 and 3-1-1 came after proposal two was launched. Community members submitted 3-1-1 proposals and t reviewed them and discussed them with Ross. We have been saying that you cannot have a 3-1-1 without busing from City Avenue or losing walking zones. This plan loses the walk zone around LM. The Board's comfort level with this type of a plan has grown since we started the process. Chris From: Ebby, David A. [maito:David.Ebby @dbr.com) Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 10:52AM ‘To: McGinley, Christopher Ce: kroos@wispear.com; LPliskin@kravcosimon.com; Diane DiBonaventuro; Gary Friedlander; Jerry Novick; Susan Guthrie; |_doucette@yahioo.com; Lyn Kugel; Ted Lorenz; mshafer@wispearl.com Subject: RE: scenario &pdf - Adobe Reader @ PAS LMSD05222