Those cuts and closures only addressed the short-term problem. Over the next five years the district projects a $40 million deficit. That's an awful lot of red in the ledger.

To get itself back in the black, the district appears be using a whittling knife to carve out a redwood tree-size problem. In the upcoming 2005­06 school year, approximately $10 million will be slashed from the budget, which is necessary to balance the numbers. Yet to accomplish this the district plans to close two more elementary schools and one middle school. But that still leaves a staggering $30 million of red ink to wrestle with in the future.

If all these closure recommendations go according to plan, the tally will be five elementary schools and one middle school in two years. Residents who send their children to schools in the district have to ask, "How many more schools will be considered in the future with another $30 million to go?" They also have to question the long-term solvency of the schools the children currently attend.

To ameliorate part of the problem the district is asking residents once again to step up to plate and approve a parcel tax during a special election in March 2006. Approving this measure will enable the district to preserve the middle school sixth period, which is sitting precariously on the edge of the balance sheets.

But even if a super majority passes the measure, one of the biggest problems still fueling the deficit remains--the district's continuing decline in student enrollment. Student numbers play a critical part in the dollars received on state and federal levels, and they continue to go the wrong way.

So how does the district bring these children back into the schools? This should be its primary focus. But by continuing to cut staff, eliminate specialists such as its librarians, eye potential cuts in special education programs, or cluster its premier arts, language and science curriculum into only a handful of schools, what's the attraction?

This approach will continue to erode parent trust. Parents will continue to question the honesty of the district. And the district's philosophy of giving every student the same quality education will be nothing more than false promises.

It's time for the district to plan for the future--to look for long-term solutions.

The district needs to look at the entire remaining deficit and not rely on the state or federal government to bail them out sometime in the future. These entities have already proven unreliable. What the district needs to do is to engage the parents in the community that it educates. There are many astute parents, who would willingly participant in the search for creative solutions if the district would just give them a chance. The district needs to start thinking outside the box, because the inside is in shambles.

When San Jose Unified School District Superintendent Don Inglesias gave his State of the District speech in August he said one of his major priorities was to develop strong parent and community involvement in district affairs. "We want the highest possible level of communication with parents and community," he said.

We can't think of a better time than now to start making that a reality.