Frustration at the DMV
Having read the opinions regarding the friendly and courteous service from DMV staff, I agree. But, even with a great staff, frustration can still occur.
I am over 70, the age where a trip to DMV is required to renew a driver license. In 2017, I took and passed the required DMV knowledge test, then waited for my license to arrive. When it arrived, in the upper right-hand corner was a “Federal Limits Apply” note. I went online to find out what that meant.
It meant that the license I received gave me the right to drive, but did not validate that I was the person I claimed to be.
Well, that was nonsense. I gathered up my papers of proof and returned to DMV. After review of my documents, DMV staff gave me the bad news, my “proof” was invalid. Reason, no state stamps. Being a “FLA” citizen did not appeal to me. All achievements I had made over the years carried my name, but “FLA” wiped out my name. My over 30 years in the employment market, all my writings, my books — gone. It wasn’t a good feeling. I needed my “Real ID.”
I contacted the proper government agencies and received state stamped documents. I returned to DMV with my “treasured” documents, then went home and waited for my “Real ID” to arrive. Yes, it did arrive.
The lesson I learned from this experience is, if your birth certificate does not have a “state stamp” and if your marriage license does not have a “state stamp” and if you do not bring evidence of your residence and you want a “Real ID,” you will have to make more than one trip to the DMV.
As a conflicted pro-school choice member of the teacher’s union, I attended the AVHSD School Board meeting last week on the possible re-establishment of Guidance Charter through the AVUHSD.
Our newly elected Board made this one of its first orders of business, despite the same Board recently rejecting it. The elephant in the room was the $30 million bond debt owed by Guidance for its new East Palmdale facility.
I watched as Guidance Charter’s Kamal Al-Khatib unveiled a slide presentation. The left slides seemed to represent all the previously flawed programs and poor oversight, while the right showed the planned improvements. It was an admission of fault and a plea for another chance. This must have been music to the ears of Palmdale School District lawyers. Well- meaning parents supporting Guidance based arguments on the notion that everyone deserves a second chance.
A young woman then talked about an unrelated charter near Sylmar. Finally, the Guidance principal spoke very briefly and nearly incoherently, wrapping up a presentation that fluctuated between confusing and embarrassing. Those against Guidance shared personal anecdotes of students grade levels behind where they should be. They reminded the Board this appeal has been recently rejected at the local, county and state level.
I don’t know what the School Board has beyond what I heard on Dec. 20, but short of a major revelation, it would be a scandal for our local Board to approve Guidance Charter after its previous rejections by the Palmdale School District, AVHSD, Los Angeles County Board of Education and the California Board of Education. I am no anti-charter teacher. Good charter schools can play a role in improving our product, but with all the chips on the table, Guidance Charter offered little reason why it should get that vaunted second chance.