The first poll asked people who they would vote for in the Presidential Election if the election were held now. 127 people voted in that poll, 95 of them (74%) voted for Obama, 19 (14%) for McCain, 7 (5%) for Nader and 6 (4%) were undecided.
The second poll was asking people how they would vote on the parcel tax. 117 people voted in that poll, 57% said yes and 35% said no with 8% undecided.
The second poll is actually the result we were most interested in. As some people figured out, we ran the Presidential poll in order to get some kind of baseline reading. The poll itself is not scientific, it is not a random poll, we have no idea who did or did not participate in it, we have no idea how representative it is off the population. However, having the Presidential election results give us some clues about the profile that make the second poll more useful than it otherwise would have been.
So now a few observations. I was actually a bit surprised there was only a 10 vote drop off in participation from the Presidential poll to the Parcel Tax poll. It makes it a little easier to evaluate with such a narrow gap. After all, while the blog is focused on Davis, people from outside of Davis also read this blog.
Despite the lack of scientific polling, the results for this poll were almost identical to the district’s poll results when they polled for the $140 parcel tax. Theirs was 56% to 36% with 8% undecided.
What’s interesting as well is that back in October we ran a poll on Measures P and Q and those numbers showed around 70% percent support, about the same percentage as voted in the actual election.
So the raw numbers of the Vanguard polling seems to be close to the actual results at least on this issue.
What was most important I think, is comparing the results of the Presidential poll to that of the Parcel Tax. The district is relying on the Presidential election and the enthusiasm for Obama to bring out a strong liberal vote that they hope will also support the parcel tax.
However, our results show a significant fall off from Obama to the Parcel Tax in terms of support. Yes on the Parcel Tax got 28 fewer votes than Obama. No on the Parcel Tax got 23 more votes than McCain. That indicates as much as a 33% fall from support to Obama to support for the parcel tax. That’s a pretty sizable drop off and it is a drop off in a key group–people who are inclined to vote for a perceived liberal Democrat are less inclined to vote for a school tax increase.
Clearly if you are a strategist for the school board this is a group that you want to target. Ordinarily you would think that people inclined to support Obama would also be inclined to support the parcel tax. However, that is not what is occurring in this case. There appears to be a segment of Obama supporters who are not supporting the parcel tax.
A final observation, there is a lot of expressed opposition in the comments section of the Vanguard. It does appear that these comments represents a very vocal minority of the readership of the Vanguard. Unfortunately, it is a large enough minority to prevent the parcel tax from winning the poll with the super-majority that it needs to pass in an actual election.
As I have stated in the past, I think the school district has made it difficult on itself by putting the parcel tax on the ballot in November. They have also made it difficult asking for $120 rather than $80. Their logic for the latter is that $120 is what they actually need rather than necessarily what they believe they can easily pass. They also do not want to put teachers through a potential layoff process again, like they did last winter and spring.
I understand that rationale, but this election is clearly going to require a tremendous educational campaign. The district understands the concerns of the public and their desire for accountability. They have already built in protections for a number of the expressed concerns.
The district also believes, as do I, that they have no other reasonable choice but to try to pass a parcel tax. If the vote fails, and right now it looks like that is a distinct possibility, it means cutting core programs. I have asked opponents to suggest where they would make cuts–to this point no one’s proposal has come anywhere close to the $2.3 to $2.7 needed to balance the budget that the parcel tax will provide. This last winter and spring, was an awful time, with students marching to save their classes and their teachers. The district does not want to relive that, but it will if this parcel tax does not pass.
Key questions still remain. We saw last week people passing around fliers trying to get renters to oppose the parcel tax. A few renters came to the school board meeting in opposition. The question is whether this reflects a larger movement to organize against the parcel tax or if this was an isolated incident.
Nevertheless, the district should be concerned about these results. This is going to be a long, hard and expensive battle and key constituencies may be surfacing in opposition. The next few months will be very critical for the district to organize a strong educational campaign to the public about why this parcel tax is necessary and why this is not a permanent tax increase and it does not represent a new tax every year.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Based on number of comments on the previous parcel tax story, it clearly is one topic that brings plenty of traffic to the site. 140+ comments compared to less than 30 for every story since then.
Based on number of comments on the previous parcel tax story, it clearly is one topic that brings plenty of traffic to the site. 140+ comments compared to less than 30 for every story since then.
Based on number of comments on the previous parcel tax story, it clearly is one topic that brings plenty of traffic to the site. 140+ comments compared to less than 30 for every story since then.
Based on number of comments on the previous parcel tax story, it clearly is one topic that brings plenty of traffic to the site. 140+ comments compared to less than 30 for every story since then.
Teaching must be tough-
First, you have to deal with 20-30 young minds, many with bodies that prevent them from focused concentration.
Second, you have to deal with parent’s egos. They all think they have a better idea on how their children should be taught. They all want you to pay special attention to their child and get upset when you do not respond to their continual stream of emails. They also complain about things like typos on newsletters which you go out ot the way to prepare and to keep them informed.
Third, there is a constant concern over the budget and if your job will be axed. Even if that does not happen you know there will not be enough money for supplies and you must use your own money to fill the void.
Teaching must be tough-
First, you have to deal with 20-30 young minds, many with bodies that prevent them from focused concentration.
Second, you have to deal with parent’s egos. They all think they have a better idea on how their children should be taught. They all want you to pay special attention to their child and get upset when you do not respond to their continual stream of emails. They also complain about things like typos on newsletters which you go out ot the way to prepare and to keep them informed.
Third, there is a constant concern over the budget and if your job will be axed. Even if that does not happen you know there will not be enough money for supplies and you must use your own money to fill the void.
Teaching must be tough-
First, you have to deal with 20-30 young minds, many with bodies that prevent them from focused concentration.
Second, you have to deal with parent’s egos. They all think they have a better idea on how their children should be taught. They all want you to pay special attention to their child and get upset when you do not respond to their continual stream of emails. They also complain about things like typos on newsletters which you go out ot the way to prepare and to keep them informed.
Third, there is a constant concern over the budget and if your job will be axed. Even if that does not happen you know there will not be enough money for supplies and you must use your own money to fill the void.
Teaching must be tough-
First, you have to deal with 20-30 young minds, many with bodies that prevent them from focused concentration.
Second, you have to deal with parent’s egos. They all think they have a better idea on how their children should be taught. They all want you to pay special attention to their child and get upset when you do not respond to their continual stream of emails. They also complain about things like typos on newsletters which you go out ot the way to prepare and to keep them informed.
Third, there is a constant concern over the budget and if your job will be axed. Even if that does not happen you know there will not be enough money for supplies and you must use your own money to fill the void.
“Third, there is a constant concern over the budget and if your job will be axed. Even if that does not happen you know there will not be enough money for supplies and you must use your own money to fill the void.”
In many ways, teaching in Davis is better than in many other districts.
Measure Q provides some extra funds for supplies so that teachers don’t have to feel as obligated to dig into their own wallets.
“Third, there is a constant concern over the budget and if your job will be axed. Even if that does not happen you know there will not be enough money for supplies and you must use your own money to fill the void.”
In many ways, teaching in Davis is better than in many other districts.
Measure Q provides some extra funds for supplies so that teachers don’t have to feel as obligated to dig into their own wallets.
“Third, there is a constant concern over the budget and if your job will be axed. Even if that does not happen you know there will not be enough money for supplies and you must use your own money to fill the void.”
In many ways, teaching in Davis is better than in many other districts.
Measure Q provides some extra funds for supplies so that teachers don’t have to feel as obligated to dig into their own wallets.
“Third, there is a constant concern over the budget and if your job will be axed. Even if that does not happen you know there will not be enough money for supplies and you must use your own money to fill the void.”
In many ways, teaching in Davis is better than in many other districts.
Measure Q provides some extra funds for supplies so that teachers don’t have to feel as obligated to dig into their own wallets.
I will vote in favor of the Parcel Tax. I understand people’s concerns, but we must think of the children and what’s in their best interest and in the best interest of the teachers that teach them.
I will vote in favor of the Parcel Tax. I understand people’s concerns, but we must think of the children and what’s in their best interest and in the best interest of the teachers that teach them.
I will vote in favor of the Parcel Tax. I understand people’s concerns, but we must think of the children and what’s in their best interest and in the best interest of the teachers that teach them.
I will vote in favor of the Parcel Tax. I understand people’s concerns, but we must think of the children and what’s in their best interest and in the best interest of the teachers that teach them.
I am one of the harshest critics of the parcel tax. Not necessarily because I don’t believe in it, but because I don’t see any substantive changes in the way the School District/Board does its business. What do I want then, from the School District/Board?
1. Some guarantee that schools are not going to be developer driven entities. Where is there an ordinance that states emphatically that any promised school must first go through a fiscal analysis to determine if there is enough in the way of operating expenses to support it? What have you done to ensure we don’t have to close older schools to make way for new schools as a policy matter?
2. A clear, concise, itemized budget the public can understand. The public mistrusts the School Disrict’s judgment, precisely because so many mistakes have been made in the past. Why not lay it out for us, in the Davis Enterprise and in the Davis Vanguard, for all to see? What are you hiding? And don’t tell me to go onto the website – it is a fruitless exercise in frustration. If you cannot come up with a clear and concise budget the public can fathom, then obviously you need to rethink who you hired as your budget director.
3. Where is there opportunity for meaningful community input? School Board meetings are completely inadequate. The School Board seems incapable of even listening to public input, let alone respecting it. What we need is some sort of oversight commission with respect to the entire budgeting process – not one hand picked by the School District/Board, one that is comprised of parents, teachers, adminstrators, and a City Council member. This may seem cumbersome, but citizens are fed up with not being paid attention to. If you trusted us enough to cough up $1.7 million to bail you out, then you can darn well give us an opportunity to advise you on what we think ought to be done to fix this mess (much as the HESC process for housing).
4. Where is there a regulation that forbids school employees, for a period of 5 years, from becoming employed by a consulting firm that has done business with the school district?
5. Where is there an attempt to hold onto assets and lease them out, as opposed to selling them off so there will eventually be no reserve to fall back on?
6. What have you done to ensure that if there is “declining enrollment”, it won’t trigger another budget crisis that requires the institution of another parcel tax?
7. If our schools are so dependent on state funding, what have you done to either garner a greater share, or find alternative funding sources to state money – so that every time there is a budget crunch, the School District is not scrambling for dollars. Woodland did it, and West Sacramento certainly did a better job of it than we did. Something has got to change in the way we do things.
8. Why the hostility to alternative models, such as charter schools? If you can embrace DaVinci, King High, Montessori, Independent Study, why the antipathy to charter schools?
9. There doesn’t seem to be any hierarchy of programs, to determine which ones should be the first to cut in a budget crisis. All programs are treated as if they are sacrosanct. This is insane planning – calling for constant crisis management. This is no way to run a school system.
10. Where is the push for some better commercial development, to increase tax revenues to the city. Businesses can, in turn, donate to various programs, to supplement state funding. And don’t tell me this is not allowed. That is plain hogwash. If DSF was able to obtain donations from various businesses, and funnel them back to the schools, then businesses can in effect provide some of that much needed revenue for our schools. Businesses are very often highly community minded – good will is one of a company’s most important assets.
11. We have got to be more creative in how we run our schools, and start thinking outside the box when it comes to fiscal responsibility. It cannot be business as usual anymore. Reserves have been frittered away; too many schools were built without a thought for how much in operating expenses it would cost; we are paying way too much for our Supt. when we can ill afford it.
Commenters on the blog don’t have to agree with my assessment, but the above represents some of the opposition and the reasons why (other detractors of the parcel tax can add their concerns to mine). If the School Board/District wants more support, the aforementioned is the hurdle they need to get over. To ignore it is to do so at their peril. It is as simple as that.
I am one of the harshest critics of the parcel tax. Not necessarily because I don’t believe in it, but because I don’t see any substantive changes in the way the School District/Board does its business. What do I want then, from the School District/Board?
1. Some guarantee that schools are not going to be developer driven entities. Where is there an ordinance that states emphatically that any promised school must first go through a fiscal analysis to determine if there is enough in the way of operating expenses to support it? What have you done to ensure we don’t have to close older schools to make way for new schools as a policy matter?
2. A clear, concise, itemized budget the public can understand. The public mistrusts the School Disrict’s judgment, precisely because so many mistakes have been made in the past. Why not lay it out for us, in the Davis Enterprise and in the Davis Vanguard, for all to see? What are you hiding? And don’t tell me to go onto the website – it is a fruitless exercise in frustration. If you cannot come up with a clear and concise budget the public can fathom, then obviously you need to rethink who you hired as your budget director.
3. Where is there opportunity for meaningful community input? School Board meetings are completely inadequate. The School Board seems incapable of even listening to public input, let alone respecting it. What we need is some sort of oversight commission with respect to the entire budgeting process – not one hand picked by the School District/Board, one that is comprised of parents, teachers, adminstrators, and a City Council member. This may seem cumbersome, but citizens are fed up with not being paid attention to. If you trusted us enough to cough up $1.7 million to bail you out, then you can darn well give us an opportunity to advise you on what we think ought to be done to fix this mess (much as the HESC process for housing).
4. Where is there a regulation that forbids school employees, for a period of 5 years, from becoming employed by a consulting firm that has done business with the school district?
5. Where is there an attempt to hold onto assets and lease them out, as opposed to selling them off so there will eventually be no reserve to fall back on?
6. What have you done to ensure that if there is “declining enrollment”, it won’t trigger another budget crisis that requires the institution of another parcel tax?
7. If our schools are so dependent on state funding, what have you done to either garner a greater share, or find alternative funding sources to state money – so that every time there is a budget crunch, the School District is not scrambling for dollars. Woodland did it, and West Sacramento certainly did a better job of it than we did. Something has got to change in the way we do things.
8. Why the hostility to alternative models, such as charter schools? If you can embrace DaVinci, King High, Montessori, Independent Study, why the antipathy to charter schools?
9. There doesn’t seem to be any hierarchy of programs, to determine which ones should be the first to cut in a budget crisis. All programs are treated as if they are sacrosanct. This is insane planning – calling for constant crisis management. This is no way to run a school system.
10. Where is the push for some better commercial development, to increase tax revenues to the city. Businesses can, in turn, donate to various programs, to supplement state funding. And don’t tell me this is not allowed. That is plain hogwash. If DSF was able to obtain donations from various businesses, and funnel them back to the schools, then businesses can in effect provide some of that much needed revenue for our schools. Businesses are very often highly community minded – good will is one of a company’s most important assets.
11. We have got to be more creative in how we run our schools, and start thinking outside the box when it comes to fiscal responsibility. It cannot be business as usual anymore. Reserves have been frittered away; too many schools were built without a thought for how much in operating expenses it would cost; we are paying way too much for our Supt. when we can ill afford it.
Commenters on the blog don’t have to agree with my assessment, but the above represents some of the opposition and the reasons why (other detractors of the parcel tax can add their concerns to mine). If the School Board/District wants more support, the aforementioned is the hurdle they need to get over. To ignore it is to do so at their peril. It is as simple as that.
I am one of the harshest critics of the parcel tax. Not necessarily because I don’t believe in it, but because I don’t see any substantive changes in the way the School District/Board does its business. What do I want then, from the School District/Board?
1. Some guarantee that schools are not going to be developer driven entities. Where is there an ordinance that states emphatically that any promised school must first go through a fiscal analysis to determine if there is enough in the way of operating expenses to support it? What have you done to ensure we don’t have to close older schools to make way for new schools as a policy matter?
2. A clear, concise, itemized budget the public can understand. The public mistrusts the School Disrict’s judgment, precisely because so many mistakes have been made in the past. Why not lay it out for us, in the Davis Enterprise and in the Davis Vanguard, for all to see? What are you hiding? And don’t tell me to go onto the website – it is a fruitless exercise in frustration. If you cannot come up with a clear and concise budget the public can fathom, then obviously you need to rethink who you hired as your budget director.
3. Where is there opportunity for meaningful community input? School Board meetings are completely inadequate. The School Board seems incapable of even listening to public input, let alone respecting it. What we need is some sort of oversight commission with respect to the entire budgeting process – not one hand picked by the School District/Board, one that is comprised of parents, teachers, adminstrators, and a City Council member. This may seem cumbersome, but citizens are fed up with not being paid attention to. If you trusted us enough to cough up $1.7 million to bail you out, then you can darn well give us an opportunity to advise you on what we think ought to be done to fix this mess (much as the HESC process for housing).
4. Where is there a regulation that forbids school employees, for a period of 5 years, from becoming employed by a consulting firm that has done business with the school district?
5. Where is there an attempt to hold onto assets and lease them out, as opposed to selling them off so there will eventually be no reserve to fall back on?
6. What have you done to ensure that if there is “declining enrollment”, it won’t trigger another budget crisis that requires the institution of another parcel tax?
7. If our schools are so dependent on state funding, what have you done to either garner a greater share, or find alternative funding sources to state money – so that every time there is a budget crunch, the School District is not scrambling for dollars. Woodland did it, and West Sacramento certainly did a better job of it than we did. Something has got to change in the way we do things.
8. Why the hostility to alternative models, such as charter schools? If you can embrace DaVinci, King High, Montessori, Independent Study, why the antipathy to charter schools?
9. There doesn’t seem to be any hierarchy of programs, to determine which ones should be the first to cut in a budget crisis. All programs are treated as if they are sacrosanct. This is insane planning – calling for constant crisis management. This is no way to run a school system.
10. Where is the push for some better commercial development, to increase tax revenues to the city. Businesses can, in turn, donate to various programs, to supplement state funding. And don’t tell me this is not allowed. That is plain hogwash. If DSF was able to obtain donations from various businesses, and funnel them back to the schools, then businesses can in effect provide some of that much needed revenue for our schools. Businesses are very often highly community minded – good will is one of a company’s most important assets.
11. We have got to be more creative in how we run our schools, and start thinking outside the box when it comes to fiscal responsibility. It cannot be business as usual anymore. Reserves have been frittered away; too many schools were built without a thought for how much in operating expenses it would cost; we are paying way too much for our Supt. when we can ill afford it.
Commenters on the blog don’t have to agree with my assessment, but the above represents some of the opposition and the reasons why (other detractors of the parcel tax can add their concerns to mine). If the School Board/District wants more support, the aforementioned is the hurdle they need to get over. To ignore it is to do so at their peril. It is as simple as that.
I am one of the harshest critics of the parcel tax. Not necessarily because I don’t believe in it, but because I don’t see any substantive changes in the way the School District/Board does its business. What do I want then, from the School District/Board?
1. Some guarantee that schools are not going to be developer driven entities. Where is there an ordinance that states emphatically that any promised school must first go through a fiscal analysis to determine if there is enough in the way of operating expenses to support it? What have you done to ensure we don’t have to close older schools to make way for new schools as a policy matter?
2. A clear, concise, itemized budget the public can understand. The public mistrusts the School Disrict’s judgment, precisely because so many mistakes have been made in the past. Why not lay it out for us, in the Davis Enterprise and in the Davis Vanguard, for all to see? What are you hiding? And don’t tell me to go onto the website – it is a fruitless exercise in frustration. If you cannot come up with a clear and concise budget the public can fathom, then obviously you need to rethink who you hired as your budget director.
3. Where is there opportunity for meaningful community input? School Board meetings are completely inadequate. The School Board seems incapable of even listening to public input, let alone respecting it. What we need is some sort of oversight commission with respect to the entire budgeting process – not one hand picked by the School District/Board, one that is comprised of parents, teachers, adminstrators, and a City Council member. This may seem cumbersome, but citizens are fed up with not being paid attention to. If you trusted us enough to cough up $1.7 million to bail you out, then you can darn well give us an opportunity to advise you on what we think ought to be done to fix this mess (much as the HESC process for housing).
4. Where is there a regulation that forbids school employees, for a period of 5 years, from becoming employed by a consulting firm that has done business with the school district?
5. Where is there an attempt to hold onto assets and lease them out, as opposed to selling them off so there will eventually be no reserve to fall back on?
6. What have you done to ensure that if there is “declining enrollment”, it won’t trigger another budget crisis that requires the institution of another parcel tax?
7. If our schools are so dependent on state funding, what have you done to either garner a greater share, or find alternative funding sources to state money – so that every time there is a budget crunch, the School District is not scrambling for dollars. Woodland did it, and West Sacramento certainly did a better job of it than we did. Something has got to change in the way we do things.
8. Why the hostility to alternative models, such as charter schools? If you can embrace DaVinci, King High, Montessori, Independent Study, why the antipathy to charter schools?
9. There doesn’t seem to be any hierarchy of programs, to determine which ones should be the first to cut in a budget crisis. All programs are treated as if they are sacrosanct. This is insane planning – calling for constant crisis management. This is no way to run a school system.
10. Where is the push for some better commercial development, to increase tax revenues to the city. Businesses can, in turn, donate to various programs, to supplement state funding. And don’t tell me this is not allowed. That is plain hogwash. If DSF was able to obtain donations from various businesses, and funnel them back to the schools, then businesses can in effect provide some of that much needed revenue for our schools. Businesses are very often highly community minded – good will is one of a company’s most important assets.
11. We have got to be more creative in how we run our schools, and start thinking outside the box when it comes to fiscal responsibility. It cannot be business as usual anymore. Reserves have been frittered away; too many schools were built without a thought for how much in operating expenses it would cost; we are paying way too much for our Supt. when we can ill afford it.
Commenters on the blog don’t have to agree with my assessment, but the above represents some of the opposition and the reasons why (other detractors of the parcel tax can add their concerns to mine). If the School Board/District wants more support, the aforementioned is the hurdle they need to get over. To ignore it is to do so at their peril. It is as simple as that.
“8. Why the hostility to alternative models, such as charter schools? If you can embrace DaVinci, King High, Montessori, Independent Study, why the antipathy to charter schools?”
Hostility? From me it was mild interest that morphed into apathy.
A charter school proposal will gain support if it articulates a program that is not currently offered in the district. DVHS, King HS, DSIS, Montessori, Spanish Immersion, etc. each articulate a program/vision that is clearly not offered by the mainstream program.
I was originally interested in what the VOC proposal might offer, but as I heard more about it, it seemed to be more of a school to serve the original VOE neighborhood, with seemingly many similar programs offered by the district. The main advantage of the VOC seemed to be in geography for those who happened to live in that neighborhood.
It didn’t look like a compelling enough program to be a strong draw for students from outside that neighborhood. Why would I enroll my kid in VOC if he would get more or less the same thing at the neighborhood school that is closer?
I see enthusiasm for charter schools on this blog, but in nearly every case, it looks more like arguments to have a charter school out of anger at the district (mostly connected to the closure of VOE), rather than building a vision that really draws parents and students.
“8. Why the hostility to alternative models, such as charter schools? If you can embrace DaVinci, King High, Montessori, Independent Study, why the antipathy to charter schools?”
Hostility? From me it was mild interest that morphed into apathy.
A charter school proposal will gain support if it articulates a program that is not currently offered in the district. DVHS, King HS, DSIS, Montessori, Spanish Immersion, etc. each articulate a program/vision that is clearly not offered by the mainstream program.
I was originally interested in what the VOC proposal might offer, but as I heard more about it, it seemed to be more of a school to serve the original VOE neighborhood, with seemingly many similar programs offered by the district. The main advantage of the VOC seemed to be in geography for those who happened to live in that neighborhood.
It didn’t look like a compelling enough program to be a strong draw for students from outside that neighborhood. Why would I enroll my kid in VOC if he would get more or less the same thing at the neighborhood school that is closer?
I see enthusiasm for charter schools on this blog, but in nearly every case, it looks more like arguments to have a charter school out of anger at the district (mostly connected to the closure of VOE), rather than building a vision that really draws parents and students.
“8. Why the hostility to alternative models, such as charter schools? If you can embrace DaVinci, King High, Montessori, Independent Study, why the antipathy to charter schools?”
Hostility? From me it was mild interest that morphed into apathy.
A charter school proposal will gain support if it articulates a program that is not currently offered in the district. DVHS, King HS, DSIS, Montessori, Spanish Immersion, etc. each articulate a program/vision that is clearly not offered by the mainstream program.
I was originally interested in what the VOC proposal might offer, but as I heard more about it, it seemed to be more of a school to serve the original VOE neighborhood, with seemingly many similar programs offered by the district. The main advantage of the VOC seemed to be in geography for those who happened to live in that neighborhood.
It didn’t look like a compelling enough program to be a strong draw for students from outside that neighborhood. Why would I enroll my kid in VOC if he would get more or less the same thing at the neighborhood school that is closer?
I see enthusiasm for charter schools on this blog, but in nearly every case, it looks more like arguments to have a charter school out of anger at the district (mostly connected to the closure of VOE), rather than building a vision that really draws parents and students.
“8. Why the hostility to alternative models, such as charter schools? If you can embrace DaVinci, King High, Montessori, Independent Study, why the antipathy to charter schools?”
Hostility? From me it was mild interest that morphed into apathy.
A charter school proposal will gain support if it articulates a program that is not currently offered in the district. DVHS, King HS, DSIS, Montessori, Spanish Immersion, etc. each articulate a program/vision that is clearly not offered by the mainstream program.
I was originally interested in what the VOC proposal might offer, but as I heard more about it, it seemed to be more of a school to serve the original VOE neighborhood, with seemingly many similar programs offered by the district. The main advantage of the VOC seemed to be in geography for those who happened to live in that neighborhood.
It didn’t look like a compelling enough program to be a strong draw for students from outside that neighborhood. Why would I enroll my kid in VOC if he would get more or less the same thing at the neighborhood school that is closer?
I see enthusiasm for charter schools on this blog, but in nearly every case, it looks more like arguments to have a charter school out of anger at the district (mostly connected to the closure of VOE), rather than building a vision that really draws parents and students.
Parcel Tax Detractor –
You raise some good questions. I posted just before you. I hope that the Davis School Board members address your questions, because they are on the minds of a lot of people.
I am a parcel tax supporter but you do raise questions that must be answered. Thank you.
DPD, please do what you can to get the questions to the school board members…although I’m sure they read this blog. Thank you.
Parcel Tax Detractor –
You raise some good questions. I posted just before you. I hope that the Davis School Board members address your questions, because they are on the minds of a lot of people.
I am a parcel tax supporter but you do raise questions that must be answered. Thank you.
DPD, please do what you can to get the questions to the school board members…although I’m sure they read this blog. Thank you.
Parcel Tax Detractor –
You raise some good questions. I posted just before you. I hope that the Davis School Board members address your questions, because they are on the minds of a lot of people.
I am a parcel tax supporter but you do raise questions that must be answered. Thank you.
DPD, please do what you can to get the questions to the school board members…although I’m sure they read this blog. Thank you.
Parcel Tax Detractor –
You raise some good questions. I posted just before you. I hope that the Davis School Board members address your questions, because they are on the minds of a lot of people.
I am a parcel tax supporter but you do raise questions that must be answered. Thank you.
DPD, please do what you can to get the questions to the school board members…although I’m sure they read this blog. Thank you.
The tax will be defeated at the polls. It needs 2/3 to pass. It won’t crack 60%.
The tax will be defeated at the polls. It needs 2/3 to pass. It won’t crack 60%.
The tax will be defeated at the polls. It needs 2/3 to pass. It won’t crack 60%.
The tax will be defeated at the polls. It needs 2/3 to pass. It won’t crack 60%.
2. A clear, concise, itemized budget the public can understand. The public mistrusts the School Disrict’s judgment, precisely because so many mistakes have been made in the past. Why not lay it out for us, in the Davis Enterprise and in the Davis Vanguard, for all to see? What are you hiding? And don’t tell me to go onto the website – it is a fruitless exercise in frustration. If you cannot come up with a clear and concise budget the public can fathom, then obviously you need to rethink who you hired as your budget director.
The best current explanation for next year’s budget that doesn’t involve confusing detail is the powerpoint slideshow from the June 18 school board meeting. The best summary of the district’s fiscal position is found on slide 23, “The Future of State Funding and Our Fiscal Position.”
There is a budget advisory committee that meets regularly with Bruce Colby. Meetings are open to the public. It is a forum to ask, learn about, and comment on school budget issues. The last meeting was a week ago last Wednesday.
DPD has done a pretty good job of following the budget situation, especially in more recent months. The Enterprise varies, probably depending on how many column inches they choose to allow that day for the regular story on the school board meetings.
I agree that the district website needs to be modified for easier access. And the school board and district staff need to clarify better the context for why this parcel tax is being requested.
Personally I don’t think anyone in this group (board, district staff) is necessarily out to hide anything. I did not feel that way two to three years ago.
2. A clear, concise, itemized budget the public can understand. The public mistrusts the School Disrict’s judgment, precisely because so many mistakes have been made in the past. Why not lay it out for us, in the Davis Enterprise and in the Davis Vanguard, for all to see? What are you hiding? And don’t tell me to go onto the website – it is a fruitless exercise in frustration. If you cannot come up with a clear and concise budget the public can fathom, then obviously you need to rethink who you hired as your budget director.
The best current explanation for next year’s budget that doesn’t involve confusing detail is the powerpoint slideshow from the June 18 school board meeting. The best summary of the district’s fiscal position is found on slide 23, “The Future of State Funding and Our Fiscal Position.”
There is a budget advisory committee that meets regularly with Bruce Colby. Meetings are open to the public. It is a forum to ask, learn about, and comment on school budget issues. The last meeting was a week ago last Wednesday.
DPD has done a pretty good job of following the budget situation, especially in more recent months. The Enterprise varies, probably depending on how many column inches they choose to allow that day for the regular story on the school board meetings.
I agree that the district website needs to be modified for easier access. And the school board and district staff need to clarify better the context for why this parcel tax is being requested.
Personally I don’t think anyone in this group (board, district staff) is necessarily out to hide anything. I did not feel that way two to three years ago.
2. A clear, concise, itemized budget the public can understand. The public mistrusts the School Disrict’s judgment, precisely because so many mistakes have been made in the past. Why not lay it out for us, in the Davis Enterprise and in the Davis Vanguard, for all to see? What are you hiding? And don’t tell me to go onto the website – it is a fruitless exercise in frustration. If you cannot come up with a clear and concise budget the public can fathom, then obviously you need to rethink who you hired as your budget director.
The best current explanation for next year’s budget that doesn’t involve confusing detail is the powerpoint slideshow from the June 18 school board meeting. The best summary of the district’s fiscal position is found on slide 23, “The Future of State Funding and Our Fiscal Position.”
There is a budget advisory committee that meets regularly with Bruce Colby. Meetings are open to the public. It is a forum to ask, learn about, and comment on school budget issues. The last meeting was a week ago last Wednesday.
DPD has done a pretty good job of following the budget situation, especially in more recent months. The Enterprise varies, probably depending on how many column inches they choose to allow that day for the regular story on the school board meetings.
I agree that the district website needs to be modified for easier access. And the school board and district staff need to clarify better the context for why this parcel tax is being requested.
Personally I don’t think anyone in this group (board, district staff) is necessarily out to hide anything. I did not feel that way two to three years ago.
2. A clear, concise, itemized budget the public can understand. The public mistrusts the School Disrict’s judgment, precisely because so many mistakes have been made in the past. Why not lay it out for us, in the Davis Enterprise and in the Davis Vanguard, for all to see? What are you hiding? And don’t tell me to go onto the website – it is a fruitless exercise in frustration. If you cannot come up with a clear and concise budget the public can fathom, then obviously you need to rethink who you hired as your budget director.
The best current explanation for next year’s budget that doesn’t involve confusing detail is the powerpoint slideshow from the June 18 school board meeting. The best summary of the district’s fiscal position is found on slide 23, “The Future of State Funding and Our Fiscal Position.”
There is a budget advisory committee that meets regularly with Bruce Colby. Meetings are open to the public. It is a forum to ask, learn about, and comment on school budget issues. The last meeting was a week ago last Wednesday.
DPD has done a pretty good job of following the budget situation, especially in more recent months. The Enterprise varies, probably depending on how many column inches they choose to allow that day for the regular story on the school board meetings.
I agree that the district website needs to be modified for easier access. And the school board and district staff need to clarify better the context for why this parcel tax is being requested.
Personally I don’t think anyone in this group (board, district staff) is necessarily out to hide anything. I did not feel that way two to three years ago.
“The best current explanation for next year’s budget that doesn’t involve confusing detail is the powerpoint slideshow from the June 18 school board meeting. The best summary of the district’s fiscal position is found on slide 23, “The Future of State Funding and Our Fiscal Position.””
As far as I can see, nothing on the district’s site gives any indication of how expenses have changed over the last few years. As I asked on a previous thread, what has increased expenses by $4 million? I could discern part of the problem (the state’s declining reimbursement for mandated programs), but there is nothing I’ve found that makes it possible to see the growth in specific expenses.
I realize it might be cumbersome to put together a spreadsheet showing how the major expense categories have changed. I’d be happy to do it if someone will email me the information or point me towards online references.
People need to know what they are voting for. No threats to close certain schools, no debates about the value of one program over another. Revenues are tied to enrollment. So, then, should expenses be tied to enrollment. If they’re not, what is increasing faster?
It may be that teacher pay and benefits are the major factor. The step and salary increases are a factor. If so, the board members will need to make the case for taxing the citizens to pay for more experienced teachers. Perhaps the teacher/student ratio is higher — how many FTE are there now, vs. five years ago? If so, the board needs to make the case for better staffing ratios.
But without the basic information about what we are paying for and why, we can’t make an informed decision. Just using ‘it’s for the kids’ isn’t going to cut it when people have declining incomes, a distressed housing market, a poor business climate, and increased prices for everything.
“The best current explanation for next year’s budget that doesn’t involve confusing detail is the powerpoint slideshow from the June 18 school board meeting. The best summary of the district’s fiscal position is found on slide 23, “The Future of State Funding and Our Fiscal Position.””
As far as I can see, nothing on the district’s site gives any indication of how expenses have changed over the last few years. As I asked on a previous thread, what has increased expenses by $4 million? I could discern part of the problem (the state’s declining reimbursement for mandated programs), but there is nothing I’ve found that makes it possible to see the growth in specific expenses.
I realize it might be cumbersome to put together a spreadsheet showing how the major expense categories have changed. I’d be happy to do it if someone will email me the information or point me towards online references.
People need to know what they are voting for. No threats to close certain schools, no debates about the value of one program over another. Revenues are tied to enrollment. So, then, should expenses be tied to enrollment. If they’re not, what is increasing faster?
It may be that teacher pay and benefits are the major factor. The step and salary increases are a factor. If so, the board members will need to make the case for taxing the citizens to pay for more experienced teachers. Perhaps the teacher/student ratio is higher — how many FTE are there now, vs. five years ago? If so, the board needs to make the case for better staffing ratios.
But without the basic information about what we are paying for and why, we can’t make an informed decision. Just using ‘it’s for the kids’ isn’t going to cut it when people have declining incomes, a distressed housing market, a poor business climate, and increased prices for everything.
“The best current explanation for next year’s budget that doesn’t involve confusing detail is the powerpoint slideshow from the June 18 school board meeting. The best summary of the district’s fiscal position is found on slide 23, “The Future of State Funding and Our Fiscal Position.””
As far as I can see, nothing on the district’s site gives any indication of how expenses have changed over the last few years. As I asked on a previous thread, what has increased expenses by $4 million? I could discern part of the problem (the state’s declining reimbursement for mandated programs), but there is nothing I’ve found that makes it possible to see the growth in specific expenses.
I realize it might be cumbersome to put together a spreadsheet showing how the major expense categories have changed. I’d be happy to do it if someone will email me the information or point me towards online references.
People need to know what they are voting for. No threats to close certain schools, no debates about the value of one program over another. Revenues are tied to enrollment. So, then, should expenses be tied to enrollment. If they’re not, what is increasing faster?
It may be that teacher pay and benefits are the major factor. The step and salary increases are a factor. If so, the board members will need to make the case for taxing the citizens to pay for more experienced teachers. Perhaps the teacher/student ratio is higher — how many FTE are there now, vs. five years ago? If so, the board needs to make the case for better staffing ratios.
But without the basic information about what we are paying for and why, we can’t make an informed decision. Just using ‘it’s for the kids’ isn’t going to cut it when people have declining incomes, a distressed housing market, a poor business climate, and increased prices for everything.
“The best current explanation for next year’s budget that doesn’t involve confusing detail is the powerpoint slideshow from the June 18 school board meeting. The best summary of the district’s fiscal position is found on slide 23, “The Future of State Funding and Our Fiscal Position.””
As far as I can see, nothing on the district’s site gives any indication of how expenses have changed over the last few years. As I asked on a previous thread, what has increased expenses by $4 million? I could discern part of the problem (the state’s declining reimbursement for mandated programs), but there is nothing I’ve found that makes it possible to see the growth in specific expenses.
I realize it might be cumbersome to put together a spreadsheet showing how the major expense categories have changed. I’d be happy to do it if someone will email me the information or point me towards online references.
People need to know what they are voting for. No threats to close certain schools, no debates about the value of one program over another. Revenues are tied to enrollment. So, then, should expenses be tied to enrollment. If they’re not, what is increasing faster?
It may be that teacher pay and benefits are the major factor. The step and salary increases are a factor. If so, the board members will need to make the case for taxing the citizens to pay for more experienced teachers. Perhaps the teacher/student ratio is higher — how many FTE are there now, vs. five years ago? If so, the board needs to make the case for better staffing ratios.
But without the basic information about what we are paying for and why, we can’t make an informed decision. Just using ‘it’s for the kids’ isn’t going to cut it when people have declining incomes, a distressed housing market, a poor business climate, and increased prices for everything.
what have you done to either garner a greater share, or find alternative funding sources to state money – so that every time there is a budget crunch, the School District is not scrambling for dollars.
For one thing, the District does have a working group of parents, teachers, board members and community members (at least one city council member is among this group) who have been meeting in Sacramento with legislators to lobby for greater funding.
what have you done to either garner a greater share, or find alternative funding sources to state money – so that every time there is a budget crunch, the School District is not scrambling for dollars.
For one thing, the District does have a working group of parents, teachers, board members and community members (at least one city council member is among this group) who have been meeting in Sacramento with legislators to lobby for greater funding.
what have you done to either garner a greater share, or find alternative funding sources to state money – so that every time there is a budget crunch, the School District is not scrambling for dollars.
For one thing, the District does have a working group of parents, teachers, board members and community members (at least one city council member is among this group) who have been meeting in Sacramento with legislators to lobby for greater funding.
what have you done to either garner a greater share, or find alternative funding sources to state money – so that every time there is a budget crunch, the School District is not scrambling for dollars.
For one thing, the District does have a working group of parents, teachers, board members and community members (at least one city council member is among this group) who have been meeting in Sacramento with legislators to lobby for greater funding.
“The step and salary increases are a factor. If so, the board members will need to make the case for taxing the citizens to pay for more experienced teachers.”
The alternative would be firing the more experienced teachers to hire newer, cheaper ones, but this has two drawbacks –
1) then you lose the more experienced teachers, and
2) it’s illegal. State education code mandates that layoffs must be based on last hired, first fired.
I’ve heard Bruce Colby state that step increases alone cost the district an additional $600k per year, I believe was the figure.
“The step and salary increases are a factor. If so, the board members will need to make the case for taxing the citizens to pay for more experienced teachers.”
The alternative would be firing the more experienced teachers to hire newer, cheaper ones, but this has two drawbacks –
1) then you lose the more experienced teachers, and
2) it’s illegal. State education code mandates that layoffs must be based on last hired, first fired.
I’ve heard Bruce Colby state that step increases alone cost the district an additional $600k per year, I believe was the figure.
“The step and salary increases are a factor. If so, the board members will need to make the case for taxing the citizens to pay for more experienced teachers.”
The alternative would be firing the more experienced teachers to hire newer, cheaper ones, but this has two drawbacks –
1) then you lose the more experienced teachers, and
2) it’s illegal. State education code mandates that layoffs must be based on last hired, first fired.
I’ve heard Bruce Colby state that step increases alone cost the district an additional $600k per year, I believe was the figure.
“The step and salary increases are a factor. If so, the board members will need to make the case for taxing the citizens to pay for more experienced teachers.”
The alternative would be firing the more experienced teachers to hire newer, cheaper ones, but this has two drawbacks –
1) then you lose the more experienced teachers, and
2) it’s illegal. State education code mandates that layoffs must be based on last hired, first fired.
I’ve heard Bruce Colby state that step increases alone cost the district an additional $600k per year, I believe was the figure.
David: You just don't get it.
I am as socially and envornmentally liberal as anyone you will ever meet, but you are WRONG, WRONG & WRONG for supporting a $120 School District parcel tax. (And, yes, I am definitely voting for Obama.)
What you and many so-called "liberals" and "progressives" don't seem to understand is that we all (regardless of political "stripes"-) have limits to our trust (and willingness to hand over even more dollars) to elected officials who have wasted our hard-earned money in the past.
The Davis JUSD has fed voraciously off the good hearts, treasured educational values and deep pockets of Davis voters for many years. After luring us into giving them more money to "remodel and refurbish" our schools (including Valley Oak and Emerson) several years ago, they have now closed the most diverse elementary school in Davis (Valley Oak) and threatened to close Emerson Junior HS. (How many millions of our dollars did they waste there?)
Then, only last Fall, voters approved an increase to $200 per year for a DJUSD tax (thinking that would take care of our schools for the near, if not distant, future), community volunteers raised and contributed $1.7 million to the DJUSD, a consulting firm (paid with our tax dollars) polled residents and recommended an additional parcel tax of no more than $80.
And now, in the full bloom of it's arrogance, the DJUSD wants us to pay $120 MORE – in the form of a "parcel" tax (one of the most regressive taxation methods ever created). How on earth can you expect your readers to vote for such a measure, knowing that it would hurt so many people on fixed incomes, unfairly tax both renters and homeowners who live in modest homes or apartments and condone the recent mis-sepending of our hard-earned dollars by the DJUSD?
I am voting NO, as will many of your readers. You are doing a great job with the Vanguard, but you don't really understand the pulse or concerns of the community. Liberal? Yes. A breaking point? Yes.
You are so wrong on this issue, in so many ways, that I'm not sure I can trust or believe in you in the future. You are very talented and dedicated, so I hope you'll prove me wrong.
Rick E
David: You just don't get it.
I am as socially and envornmentally liberal as anyone you will ever meet, but you are WRONG, WRONG & WRONG for supporting a $120 School District parcel tax. (And, yes, I am definitely voting for Obama.)
What you and many so-called "liberals" and "progressives" don't seem to understand is that we all (regardless of political "stripes"-) have limits to our trust (and willingness to hand over even more dollars) to elected officials who have wasted our hard-earned money in the past.
The Davis JUSD has fed voraciously off the good hearts, treasured educational values and deep pockets of Davis voters for many years. After luring us into giving them more money to "remodel and refurbish" our schools (including Valley Oak and Emerson) several years ago, they have now closed the most diverse elementary school in Davis (Valley Oak) and threatened to close Emerson Junior HS. (How many millions of our dollars did they waste there?)
Then, only last Fall, voters approved an increase to $200 per year for a DJUSD tax (thinking that would take care of our schools for the near, if not distant, future), community volunteers raised and contributed $1.7 million to the DJUSD, a consulting firm (paid with our tax dollars) polled residents and recommended an additional parcel tax of no more than $80.
And now, in the full bloom of it's arrogance, the DJUSD wants us to pay $120 MORE – in the form of a "parcel" tax (one of the most regressive taxation methods ever created). How on earth can you expect your readers to vote for such a measure, knowing that it would hurt so many people on fixed incomes, unfairly tax both renters and homeowners who live in modest homes or apartments and condone the recent mis-sepending of our hard-earned dollars by the DJUSD?
I am voting NO, as will many of your readers. You are doing a great job with the Vanguard, but you don't really understand the pulse or concerns of the community. Liberal? Yes. A breaking point? Yes.
You are so wrong on this issue, in so many ways, that I'm not sure I can trust or believe in you in the future. You are very talented and dedicated, so I hope you'll prove me wrong.
Rick E
David: You just don't get it.
I am as socially and envornmentally liberal as anyone you will ever meet, but you are WRONG, WRONG & WRONG for supporting a $120 School District parcel tax. (And, yes, I am definitely voting for Obama.)
What you and many so-called "liberals" and "progressives" don't seem to understand is that we all (regardless of political "stripes"-) have limits to our trust (and willingness to hand over even more dollars) to elected officials who have wasted our hard-earned money in the past.
The Davis JUSD has fed voraciously off the good hearts, treasured educational values and deep pockets of Davis voters for many years. After luring us into giving them more money to "remodel and refurbish" our schools (including Valley Oak and Emerson) several years ago, they have now closed the most diverse elementary school in Davis (Valley Oak) and threatened to close Emerson Junior HS. (How many millions of our dollars did they waste there?)
Then, only last Fall, voters approved an increase to $200 per year for a DJUSD tax (thinking that would take care of our schools for the near, if not distant, future), community volunteers raised and contributed $1.7 million to the DJUSD, a consulting firm (paid with our tax dollars) polled residents and recommended an additional parcel tax of no more than $80.
And now, in the full bloom of it's arrogance, the DJUSD wants us to pay $120 MORE – in the form of a "parcel" tax (one of the most regressive taxation methods ever created). How on earth can you expect your readers to vote for such a measure, knowing that it would hurt so many people on fixed incomes, unfairly tax both renters and homeowners who live in modest homes or apartments and condone the recent mis-sepending of our hard-earned dollars by the DJUSD?
I am voting NO, as will many of your readers. You are doing a great job with the Vanguard, but you don't really understand the pulse or concerns of the community. Liberal? Yes. A breaking point? Yes.
You are so wrong on this issue, in so many ways, that I'm not sure I can trust or believe in you in the future. You are very talented and dedicated, so I hope you'll prove me wrong.
Rick E
David: You just don't get it.
I am as socially and envornmentally liberal as anyone you will ever meet, but you are WRONG, WRONG & WRONG for supporting a $120 School District parcel tax. (And, yes, I am definitely voting for Obama.)
What you and many so-called "liberals" and "progressives" don't seem to understand is that we all (regardless of political "stripes"-) have limits to our trust (and willingness to hand over even more dollars) to elected officials who have wasted our hard-earned money in the past.
The Davis JUSD has fed voraciously off the good hearts, treasured educational values and deep pockets of Davis voters for many years. After luring us into giving them more money to "remodel and refurbish" our schools (including Valley Oak and Emerson) several years ago, they have now closed the most diverse elementary school in Davis (Valley Oak) and threatened to close Emerson Junior HS. (How many millions of our dollars did they waste there?)
Then, only last Fall, voters approved an increase to $200 per year for a DJUSD tax (thinking that would take care of our schools for the near, if not distant, future), community volunteers raised and contributed $1.7 million to the DJUSD, a consulting firm (paid with our tax dollars) polled residents and recommended an additional parcel tax of no more than $80.
And now, in the full bloom of it's arrogance, the DJUSD wants us to pay $120 MORE – in the form of a "parcel" tax (one of the most regressive taxation methods ever created). How on earth can you expect your readers to vote for such a measure, knowing that it would hurt so many people on fixed incomes, unfairly tax both renters and homeowners who live in modest homes or apartments and condone the recent mis-sepending of our hard-earned dollars by the DJUSD?
I am voting NO, as will many of your readers. You are doing a great job with the Vanguard, but you don't really understand the pulse or concerns of the community. Liberal? Yes. A breaking point? Yes.
You are so wrong on this issue, in so many ways, that I'm not sure I can trust or believe in you in the future. You are very talented and dedicated, so I hope you'll prove me wrong.
Rick E
l agree with many of 11:12am’s and Don Shor’s points. In addition l think many of us are confused about why Measure Q funds won’t help….and if it is because they are pigeon-holed into only certain categories of aide, maybe we need to change that. We just returned from Oregon where we learned many small towns and smaller built libraries with library bond monies only to not pass two operational bonds, so many of the libraries are not open or on very reduced hrs;
AND l was distressed to read in the Enterprise that one of the SB mebers said THIS parcel tax was for the ‘core’ programs of Davis schools, music, art, etc. ?core
l agree with many of 11:12am’s and Don Shor’s points. In addition l think many of us are confused about why Measure Q funds won’t help….and if it is because they are pigeon-holed into only certain categories of aide, maybe we need to change that. We just returned from Oregon where we learned many small towns and smaller built libraries with library bond monies only to not pass two operational bonds, so many of the libraries are not open or on very reduced hrs;
AND l was distressed to read in the Enterprise that one of the SB mebers said THIS parcel tax was for the ‘core’ programs of Davis schools, music, art, etc. ?core
l agree with many of 11:12am’s and Don Shor’s points. In addition l think many of us are confused about why Measure Q funds won’t help….and if it is because they are pigeon-holed into only certain categories of aide, maybe we need to change that. We just returned from Oregon where we learned many small towns and smaller built libraries with library bond monies only to not pass two operational bonds, so many of the libraries are not open or on very reduced hrs;
AND l was distressed to read in the Enterprise that one of the SB mebers said THIS parcel tax was for the ‘core’ programs of Davis schools, music, art, etc. ?core
l agree with many of 11:12am’s and Don Shor’s points. In addition l think many of us are confused about why Measure Q funds won’t help….and if it is because they are pigeon-holed into only certain categories of aide, maybe we need to change that. We just returned from Oregon where we learned many small towns and smaller built libraries with library bond monies only to not pass two operational bonds, so many of the libraries are not open or on very reduced hrs;
AND l was distressed to read in the Enterprise that one of the SB mebers said THIS parcel tax was for the ‘core’ programs of Davis schools, music, art, etc. ?core
The discussion about “waste” is obviously an overblown topic, if you bother to look at the data that is available. The problem has much more to do with the restriction of money flowing in rather than how the outflow is being spent.
I appreciate the desire to know where the $120 is going. As that is being done we should remember that we pay about 50X that amount on other property taxes. It might be worthwhile to figure out the benefit related to that outlay also.
The discussion about “waste” is obviously an overblown topic, if you bother to look at the data that is available. The problem has much more to do with the restriction of money flowing in rather than how the outflow is being spent.
I appreciate the desire to know where the $120 is going. As that is being done we should remember that we pay about 50X that amount on other property taxes. It might be worthwhile to figure out the benefit related to that outlay also.
The discussion about “waste” is obviously an overblown topic, if you bother to look at the data that is available. The problem has much more to do with the restriction of money flowing in rather than how the outflow is being spent.
I appreciate the desire to know where the $120 is going. As that is being done we should remember that we pay about 50X that amount on other property taxes. It might be worthwhile to figure out the benefit related to that outlay also.
The discussion about “waste” is obviously an overblown topic, if you bother to look at the data that is available. The problem has much more to do with the restriction of money flowing in rather than how the outflow is being spent.
I appreciate the desire to know where the $120 is going. As that is being done we should remember that we pay about 50X that amount on other property taxes. It might be worthwhile to figure out the benefit related to that outlay also.
” a consulting firm (paid with our tax dollars) polled residents and recommended an additional parcel tax of no more than $80.”
You suggest that the pollster said to the school board, “you all should go with $80.” I don’t think the consulting firm recommended that at all. I understood the conclusions to be that if the election were held on the day of the poll, this is what the vote would probably be. $80 would be easier to pass than $140.
If we relied with such high certainty on polls, then at different times we could have anticipated the coming of Presidents Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry.
” a consulting firm (paid with our tax dollars) polled residents and recommended an additional parcel tax of no more than $80.”
You suggest that the pollster said to the school board, “you all should go with $80.” I don’t think the consulting firm recommended that at all. I understood the conclusions to be that if the election were held on the day of the poll, this is what the vote would probably be. $80 would be easier to pass than $140.
If we relied with such high certainty on polls, then at different times we could have anticipated the coming of Presidents Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry.
” a consulting firm (paid with our tax dollars) polled residents and recommended an additional parcel tax of no more than $80.”
You suggest that the pollster said to the school board, “you all should go with $80.” I don’t think the consulting firm recommended that at all. I understood the conclusions to be that if the election were held on the day of the poll, this is what the vote would probably be. $80 would be easier to pass than $140.
If we relied with such high certainty on polls, then at different times we could have anticipated the coming of Presidents Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry.
” a consulting firm (paid with our tax dollars) polled residents and recommended an additional parcel tax of no more than $80.”
You suggest that the pollster said to the school board, “you all should go with $80.” I don’t think the consulting firm recommended that at all. I understood the conclusions to be that if the election were held on the day of the poll, this is what the vote would probably be. $80 would be easier to pass than $140.
If we relied with such high certainty on polls, then at different times we could have anticipated the coming of Presidents Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry.
Rick E, when have you ever supported paying anything above your low prop 13 property taxes? You try to come off so reasonable claiming support for Obama but if you are the Rick E I think you are you have a log history of opposing ballot measures to pay for the additional funds needed to keep this town solvent.
Rick E, when have you ever supported paying anything above your low prop 13 property taxes? You try to come off so reasonable claiming support for Obama but if you are the Rick E I think you are you have a log history of opposing ballot measures to pay for the additional funds needed to keep this town solvent.
Rick E, when have you ever supported paying anything above your low prop 13 property taxes? You try to come off so reasonable claiming support for Obama but if you are the Rick E I think you are you have a log history of opposing ballot measures to pay for the additional funds needed to keep this town solvent.
Rick E, when have you ever supported paying anything above your low prop 13 property taxes? You try to come off so reasonable claiming support for Obama but if you are the Rick E I think you are you have a log history of opposing ballot measures to pay for the additional funds needed to keep this town solvent.
“The alternative would be firing the more experienced teachers to hire newer, cheaper ones…”
My point wasn’t to highlight the cost of teachers, but to emphasize that we need to know exactly what has caused expenses to increase so much faster than revenues. But some districts are simply allowing attrition to reduce payroll costs.
If you want to see what districts around the state have been doing, check out the CA DofE web site “Budget Crisis Report Card”:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/re/ht/bcrc.asp
“The alternative would be firing the more experienced teachers to hire newer, cheaper ones…”
My point wasn’t to highlight the cost of teachers, but to emphasize that we need to know exactly what has caused expenses to increase so much faster than revenues. But some districts are simply allowing attrition to reduce payroll costs.
If you want to see what districts around the state have been doing, check out the CA DofE web site “Budget Crisis Report Card”:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/re/ht/bcrc.asp
“The alternative would be firing the more experienced teachers to hire newer, cheaper ones…”
My point wasn’t to highlight the cost of teachers, but to emphasize that we need to know exactly what has caused expenses to increase so much faster than revenues. But some districts are simply allowing attrition to reduce payroll costs.
If you want to see what districts around the state have been doing, check out the CA DofE web site “Budget Crisis Report Card”:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/re/ht/bcrc.asp
“The alternative would be firing the more experienced teachers to hire newer, cheaper ones…”
My point wasn’t to highlight the cost of teachers, but to emphasize that we need to know exactly what has caused expenses to increase so much faster than revenues. But some districts are simply allowing attrition to reduce payroll costs.
If you want to see what districts around the state have been doing, check out the CA DofE web site “Budget Crisis Report Card”:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/re/ht/bcrc.asp
I’ve heard Bruce Colby state that step increases alone cost the district an additional $600k per year, I believe was the figure.
And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.
I’ve heard Bruce Colby state that step increases alone cost the district an additional $600k per year, I believe was the figure.
And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.
I’ve heard Bruce Colby state that step increases alone cost the district an additional $600k per year, I believe was the figure.
And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.
I’ve heard Bruce Colby state that step increases alone cost the district an additional $600k per year, I believe was the figure.
And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.
l think many of us are confused about why Measure Q funds won’t help….and if it is because they are pigeon-holed into only certain categories of aide, maybe we need to change that.
This is what Measure Q funds (go to link). Law requires that a parcel tax has to state specifically what it is to fund when voters go to the polls. People wanted to know exactly what they’re voting for in Measure Q, so you can’t go and divert Measure Q funds to something else.
The proposed parcel tax basically covers what was originally slated for cuts this past spring.
l think many of us are confused about why Measure Q funds won’t help….and if it is because they are pigeon-holed into only certain categories of aide, maybe we need to change that.
This is what Measure Q funds (go to link). Law requires that a parcel tax has to state specifically what it is to fund when voters go to the polls. People wanted to know exactly what they’re voting for in Measure Q, so you can’t go and divert Measure Q funds to something else.
The proposed parcel tax basically covers what was originally slated for cuts this past spring.
l think many of us are confused about why Measure Q funds won’t help….and if it is because they are pigeon-holed into only certain categories of aide, maybe we need to change that.
This is what Measure Q funds (go to link). Law requires that a parcel tax has to state specifically what it is to fund when voters go to the polls. People wanted to know exactly what they’re voting for in Measure Q, so you can’t go and divert Measure Q funds to something else.
The proposed parcel tax basically covers what was originally slated for cuts this past spring.
l think many of us are confused about why Measure Q funds won’t help….and if it is because they are pigeon-holed into only certain categories of aide, maybe we need to change that.
This is what Measure Q funds (go to link). Law requires that a parcel tax has to state specifically what it is to fund when voters go to the polls. People wanted to know exactly what they’re voting for in Measure Q, so you can’t go and divert Measure Q funds to something else.
The proposed parcel tax basically covers what was originally slated for cuts this past spring.
WDF – You are correct and Mr. Colby did not inform the public about the state not covering COLAs this year.
WDF – You are correct and Mr. Colby did not inform the public about the state not covering COLAs this year.
WDF – You are correct and Mr. Colby did not inform the public about the state not covering COLAs this year.
WDF – You are correct and Mr. Colby did not inform the public about the state not covering COLAs this year.
Don Shor said…
I realize it might be cumbersome to put together a spreadsheet showing how the major expense categories have changed. I’d be happy to do it if someone will email me the information or point me towards online references.
I’ve never taken enough time to look at all the details, but the ed-data.k12.ca.us website has a lot of information on district finances going back 10+ years.
It’s a start.
Don Shor said…
I realize it might be cumbersome to put together a spreadsheet showing how the major expense categories have changed. I’d be happy to do it if someone will email me the information or point me towards online references.
I’ve never taken enough time to look at all the details, but the ed-data.k12.ca.us website has a lot of information on district finances going back 10+ years.
It’s a start.
Don Shor said…
I realize it might be cumbersome to put together a spreadsheet showing how the major expense categories have changed. I’d be happy to do it if someone will email me the information or point me towards online references.
I’ve never taken enough time to look at all the details, but the ed-data.k12.ca.us website has a lot of information on district finances going back 10+ years.
It’s a start.
Don Shor said…
I realize it might be cumbersome to put together a spreadsheet showing how the major expense categories have changed. I’d be happy to do it if someone will email me the information or point me towards online references.
I’ve never taken enough time to look at all the details, but the ed-data.k12.ca.us website has a lot of information on district finances going back 10+ years.
It’s a start.
BB: Rick E, when have you ever supported paying anything above your low prop 13 property taxes?
Why does Black Bart always make (unsubstantiated) personal attacks, instead of addressing the substance of the person’s comments? It’s a shame that BB thinks this wins an argument.
BB: Rick E, when have you ever supported paying anything above your low prop 13 property taxes?
Why does Black Bart always make (unsubstantiated) personal attacks, instead of addressing the substance of the person’s comments? It’s a shame that BB thinks this wins an argument.
BB: Rick E, when have you ever supported paying anything above your low prop 13 property taxes?
Why does Black Bart always make (unsubstantiated) personal attacks, instead of addressing the substance of the person’s comments? It’s a shame that BB thinks this wins an argument.
BB: Rick E, when have you ever supported paying anything above your low prop 13 property taxes?
Why does Black Bart always make (unsubstantiated) personal attacks, instead of addressing the substance of the person’s comments? It’s a shame that BB thinks this wins an argument.
Education is expensive, but it is far better than the alternatives.
Education is expensive, but it is far better than the alternatives.
Education is expensive, but it is far better than the alternatives.
Education is expensive, but it is far better than the alternatives.
Rick E does not pay a dime in parcel taxes. Never has. Relies on someone else for that. Yet here he is, all outraged about how HIS tax payments are going up? Rick, you just like the power you feel. And you dont have kids in the schools, so ya, baby, go take out someone else’s needed public services so you can feel good. Pathetic.
Rick E does not pay a dime in parcel taxes. Never has. Relies on someone else for that. Yet here he is, all outraged about how HIS tax payments are going up? Rick, you just like the power you feel. And you dont have kids in the schools, so ya, baby, go take out someone else’s needed public services so you can feel good. Pathetic.
Rick E does not pay a dime in parcel taxes. Never has. Relies on someone else for that. Yet here he is, all outraged about how HIS tax payments are going up? Rick, you just like the power you feel. And you dont have kids in the schools, so ya, baby, go take out someone else’s needed public services so you can feel good. Pathetic.
Rick E does not pay a dime in parcel taxes. Never has. Relies on someone else for that. Yet here he is, all outraged about how HIS tax payments are going up? Rick, you just like the power you feel. And you dont have kids in the schools, so ya, baby, go take out someone else’s needed public services so you can feel good. Pathetic.
“And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.”
Where did you get the info that the state isn’t granting COLA? The Leg Analyst’s office shows COLA of 4.5% for 07-08, and 5.4% for 08-09. The LAO and the governor have proposals for modifying how the COLA is calculated, but I don’t find any indication that it is being cancelled.
“And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.”
Where did you get the info that the state isn’t granting COLA? The Leg Analyst’s office shows COLA of 4.5% for 07-08, and 5.4% for 08-09. The LAO and the governor have proposals for modifying how the COLA is calculated, but I don’t find any indication that it is being cancelled.
“And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.”
Where did you get the info that the state isn’t granting COLA? The Leg Analyst’s office shows COLA of 4.5% for 07-08, and 5.4% for 08-09. The LAO and the governor have proposals for modifying how the COLA is calculated, but I don’t find any indication that it is being cancelled.
“And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.”
Where did you get the info that the state isn’t granting COLA? The Leg Analyst’s office shows COLA of 4.5% for 07-08, and 5.4% for 08-09. The LAO and the governor have proposals for modifying how the COLA is calculated, but I don’t find any indication that it is being cancelled.
I was told the same today by a board member. And I believe I was told it yesterday by the UC human relations rep as well.
I was told the same today by a board member. And I believe I was told it yesterday by the UC human relations rep as well.
I was told the same today by a board member. And I believe I was told it yesterday by the UC human relations rep as well.
I was told the same today by a board member. And I believe I was told it yesterday by the UC human relations rep as well.
Its important to understand the anti tax history of Rick E to keep his objections in perspective. Others can respond to the arguments but they might not know about other assessments that he has fought over the years. In fact, I believe, he has at times been a leader of the opposition to some parcel taxes.I think people knowing posters historical patterns of behavior is relevent.
Its important to understand the anti tax history of Rick E to keep his objections in perspective. Others can respond to the arguments but they might not know about other assessments that he has fought over the years. In fact, I believe, he has at times been a leader of the opposition to some parcel taxes.I think people knowing posters historical patterns of behavior is relevent.
Its important to understand the anti tax history of Rick E to keep his objections in perspective. Others can respond to the arguments but they might not know about other assessments that he has fought over the years. In fact, I believe, he has at times been a leader of the opposition to some parcel taxes.I think people knowing posters historical patterns of behavior is relevent.
Its important to understand the anti tax history of Rick E to keep his objections in perspective. Others can respond to the arguments but they might not know about other assessments that he has fought over the years. In fact, I believe, he has at times been a leader of the opposition to some parcel taxes.I think people knowing posters historical patterns of behavior is relevent.
According to the CA Dept of Education, the governor has proposed eliminating COLA for special education and for Child Care and Development programs. He has proposed revising how COLA is calculated for other programs, the effect of which would be to reduce COLA from 4.94% to 3.65%. The legislative analyst’s office has proposed a different revision for COLA that also reduces it. LAO proposes having that change take effect for 08-09. What the legislative leaders are discussing is anyone’s guess, but I don’t know how any school board member or university rep would know.
According to the CA Dept of Education, the governor has proposed eliminating COLA for special education and for Child Care and Development programs. He has proposed revising how COLA is calculated for other programs, the effect of which would be to reduce COLA from 4.94% to 3.65%. The legislative analyst’s office has proposed a different revision for COLA that also reduces it. LAO proposes having that change take effect for 08-09. What the legislative leaders are discussing is anyone’s guess, but I don’t know how any school board member or university rep would know.
According to the CA Dept of Education, the governor has proposed eliminating COLA for special education and for Child Care and Development programs. He has proposed revising how COLA is calculated for other programs, the effect of which would be to reduce COLA from 4.94% to 3.65%. The legislative analyst’s office has proposed a different revision for COLA that also reduces it. LAO proposes having that change take effect for 08-09. What the legislative leaders are discussing is anyone’s guess, but I don’t know how any school board member or university rep would know.
According to the CA Dept of Education, the governor has proposed eliminating COLA for special education and for Child Care and Development programs. He has proposed revising how COLA is calculated for other programs, the effect of which would be to reduce COLA from 4.94% to 3.65%. The legislative analyst’s office has proposed a different revision for COLA that also reduces it. LAO proposes having that change take effect for 08-09. What the legislative leaders are discussing is anyone’s guess, but I don’t know how any school board member or university rep would know.
Don Shor said…
“And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.”
Where did you get the info that the state isn’t granting COLA? The Leg Analyst’s office shows COLA of 4.5% for 07-08, and 5.4% for 08-09. The LAO and the governor have proposals for modifying how the COLA is calculated, but I don’t find any indication that it is being cancelled.
Current budget assumptions for the district depend on the May Revise. They may change, depending on what the legislature ultimately decides.
A partial summary of the May Revise for education is here, under subheading “Revenue Limits.”
Don Shor said…
“And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.”
Where did you get the info that the state isn’t granting COLA? The Leg Analyst’s office shows COLA of 4.5% for 07-08, and 5.4% for 08-09. The LAO and the governor have proposals for modifying how the COLA is calculated, but I don’t find any indication that it is being cancelled.
Current budget assumptions for the district depend on the May Revise. They may change, depending on what the legislature ultimately decides.
A partial summary of the May Revise for education is here, under subheading “Revenue Limits.”
Don Shor said…
“And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.”
Where did you get the info that the state isn’t granting COLA? The Leg Analyst’s office shows COLA of 4.5% for 07-08, and 5.4% for 08-09. The LAO and the governor have proposals for modifying how the COLA is calculated, but I don’t find any indication that it is being cancelled.
Current budget assumptions for the district depend on the May Revise. They may change, depending on what the legislature ultimately decides.
A partial summary of the May Revise for education is here, under subheading “Revenue Limits.”
Don Shor said…
“And that increase is normally covered by the COLA, which the state is not granting this year, and which the district has to eat.”
Where did you get the info that the state isn’t granting COLA? The Leg Analyst’s office shows COLA of 4.5% for 07-08, and 5.4% for 08-09. The LAO and the governor have proposals for modifying how the COLA is calculated, but I don’t find any indication that it is being cancelled.
Current budget assumptions for the district depend on the May Revise. They may change, depending on what the legislature ultimately decides.
A partial summary of the May Revise for education is here, under subheading “Revenue Limits.”
This is compiled from various sources, and I’m sure some of the numbers are rough. We can probably figure out a better way to present the data. But for now, here is a table showing budget figures for the last few years:
http://redwoodbarn.com/DJUSDbudgets.htm
This is compiled from various sources, and I’m sure some of the numbers are rough. We can probably figure out a better way to present the data. But for now, here is a table showing budget figures for the last few years:
http://redwoodbarn.com/DJUSDbudgets.htm
This is compiled from various sources, and I’m sure some of the numbers are rough. We can probably figure out a better way to present the data. But for now, here is a table showing budget figures for the last few years:
http://redwoodbarn.com/DJUSDbudgets.htm
This is compiled from various sources, and I’m sure some of the numbers are rough. We can probably figure out a better way to present the data. But for now, here is a table showing budget figures for the last few years:
http://redwoodbarn.com/DJUSDbudgets.htm
The State Senate Democratic majority is hanging tough and hopefully the Assembly Demcratic majority will follow suit. This year, the national political mood calls for the Democratic majority to hold the Republican obstructionist “feet to the fire” when it comes to putting together a the 2/3 vote needed for a budget. In spite of the recent public posturing/bullying by the Goverator, don’t look for the Dems to cave in this time. There won’t be significant cuts in educational funding.
The State Senate Democratic majority is hanging tough and hopefully the Assembly Demcratic majority will follow suit. This year, the national political mood calls for the Democratic majority to hold the Republican obstructionist “feet to the fire” when it comes to putting together a the 2/3 vote needed for a budget. In spite of the recent public posturing/bullying by the Goverator, don’t look for the Dems to cave in this time. There won’t be significant cuts in educational funding.
The State Senate Democratic majority is hanging tough and hopefully the Assembly Demcratic majority will follow suit. This year, the national political mood calls for the Democratic majority to hold the Republican obstructionist “feet to the fire” when it comes to putting together a the 2/3 vote needed for a budget. In spite of the recent public posturing/bullying by the Goverator, don’t look for the Dems to cave in this time. There won’t be significant cuts in educational funding.
The State Senate Democratic majority is hanging tough and hopefully the Assembly Demcratic majority will follow suit. This year, the national political mood calls for the Democratic majority to hold the Republican obstructionist “feet to the fire” when it comes to putting together a the 2/3 vote needed for a budget. In spite of the recent public posturing/bullying by the Goverator, don’t look for the Dems to cave in this time. There won’t be significant cuts in educational funding.
Don,
Thanks! I suggest breaking down revenue into different sources. “Revenue limit” is the term for money that comes from the state.
Don,
Thanks! I suggest breaking down revenue into different sources. “Revenue limit” is the term for money that comes from the state.
Don,
Thanks! I suggest breaking down revenue into different sources. “Revenue limit” is the term for money that comes from the state.
Don,
Thanks! I suggest breaking down revenue into different sources. “Revenue limit” is the term for money that comes from the state.
Bruce Colby sent me a note earlier today that there is some confusion on the COLA issue.
“The statutory COLA versus the state’s ability to fund the COLA. The Revenue Limit COLA for 2008-09 in the May Revise is unfunded. What this means is that the state increases our base revenue limit rate per student as required by law but they create a deficit factor to back it out.”
He may post further comments later.
Also he invited people to the August 13, 2008 Business Advisory Meeting at 5:30 at the District Offices.
Bruce Colby sent me a note earlier today that there is some confusion on the COLA issue.
“The statutory COLA versus the state’s ability to fund the COLA. The Revenue Limit COLA for 2008-09 in the May Revise is unfunded. What this means is that the state increases our base revenue limit rate per student as required by law but they create a deficit factor to back it out.”
He may post further comments later.
Also he invited people to the August 13, 2008 Business Advisory Meeting at 5:30 at the District Offices.
Bruce Colby sent me a note earlier today that there is some confusion on the COLA issue.
“The statutory COLA versus the state’s ability to fund the COLA. The Revenue Limit COLA for 2008-09 in the May Revise is unfunded. What this means is that the state increases our base revenue limit rate per student as required by law but they create a deficit factor to back it out.”
He may post further comments later.
Also he invited people to the August 13, 2008 Business Advisory Meeting at 5:30 at the District Offices.
Bruce Colby sent me a note earlier today that there is some confusion on the COLA issue.
“The statutory COLA versus the state’s ability to fund the COLA. The Revenue Limit COLA for 2008-09 in the May Revise is unfunded. What this means is that the state increases our base revenue limit rate per student as required by law but they create a deficit factor to back it out.”
He may post further comments later.
Also he invited people to the August 13, 2008 Business Advisory Meeting at 5:30 at the District Offices.
BB said…
Its important to understand the anti tax history of Rick E to keep his objections in perspective. Others can respond to the arguments but they might not know about other assessments that he has fought over the years. In fact, I believe, he has at times been a leader of the opposition to some parcel taxes.I think people knowing posters historical patterns of behavior is relevent.
7/17/08 10:36 PM
Exactly. And count on the strategy of opposition being a laundry list of demands deliberately tailored to be impossible to satisfy so as to justify rejection of the tax.
–Richard Estes
BB said…
Its important to understand the anti tax history of Rick E to keep his objections in perspective. Others can respond to the arguments but they might not know about other assessments that he has fought over the years. In fact, I believe, he has at times been a leader of the opposition to some parcel taxes.I think people knowing posters historical patterns of behavior is relevent.
7/17/08 10:36 PM
Exactly. And count on the strategy of opposition being a laundry list of demands deliberately tailored to be impossible to satisfy so as to justify rejection of the tax.
–Richard Estes
BB said…
Its important to understand the anti tax history of Rick E to keep his objections in perspective. Others can respond to the arguments but they might not know about other assessments that he has fought over the years. In fact, I believe, he has at times been a leader of the opposition to some parcel taxes.I think people knowing posters historical patterns of behavior is relevent.
7/17/08 10:36 PM
Exactly. And count on the strategy of opposition being a laundry list of demands deliberately tailored to be impossible to satisfy so as to justify rejection of the tax.
–Richard Estes
BB said…
Its important to understand the anti tax history of Rick E to keep his objections in perspective. Others can respond to the arguments but they might not know about other assessments that he has fought over the years. In fact, I believe, he has at times been a leader of the opposition to some parcel taxes.I think people knowing posters historical patterns of behavior is relevent.
7/17/08 10:36 PM
Exactly. And count on the strategy of opposition being a laundry list of demands deliberately tailored to be impossible to satisfy so as to justify rejection of the tax.
–Richard Estes
You can have a public school program which parents are proud of and interests others in Davis, even plenty of less affluent families who look to improve the future prospects of their children. This approximates what Davis has now and can continue to have.
Or you can have a more ordinary school system that operates on the expedient philosphy of warehousing kids on the least possible money without paying adequate attention to help all students succeed.
What Davis has in its schools is “average” in other states, but is really great for the Sacramento area. We currently attract plenty of new residents who believe in the positive benefits of a good education and in what Davis schools have to offer.
This is the most accomodating parcel tax to date — an exemption for seniors, and less than half the parcel assessment for apartments ($4.17/month).
This is a great bargain for a community investment.
You can have a public school program which parents are proud of and interests others in Davis, even plenty of less affluent families who look to improve the future prospects of their children. This approximates what Davis has now and can continue to have.
Or you can have a more ordinary school system that operates on the expedient philosphy of warehousing kids on the least possible money without paying adequate attention to help all students succeed.
What Davis has in its schools is “average” in other states, but is really great for the Sacramento area. We currently attract plenty of new residents who believe in the positive benefits of a good education and in what Davis schools have to offer.
This is the most accomodating parcel tax to date — an exemption for seniors, and less than half the parcel assessment for apartments ($4.17/month).
This is a great bargain for a community investment.
You can have a public school program which parents are proud of and interests others in Davis, even plenty of less affluent families who look to improve the future prospects of their children. This approximates what Davis has now and can continue to have.
Or you can have a more ordinary school system that operates on the expedient philosphy of warehousing kids on the least possible money without paying adequate attention to help all students succeed.
What Davis has in its schools is “average” in other states, but is really great for the Sacramento area. We currently attract plenty of new residents who believe in the positive benefits of a good education and in what Davis schools have to offer.
This is the most accomodating parcel tax to date — an exemption for seniors, and less than half the parcel assessment for apartments ($4.17/month).
This is a great bargain for a community investment.
You can have a public school program which parents are proud of and interests others in Davis, even plenty of less affluent families who look to improve the future prospects of their children. This approximates what Davis has now and can continue to have.
Or you can have a more ordinary school system that operates on the expedient philosphy of warehousing kids on the least possible money without paying adequate attention to help all students succeed.
What Davis has in its schools is “average” in other states, but is really great for the Sacramento area. We currently attract plenty of new residents who believe in the positive benefits of a good education and in what Davis schools have to offer.
This is the most accomodating parcel tax to date — an exemption for seniors, and less than half the parcel assessment for apartments ($4.17/month).
This is a great bargain for a community investment.
You can have a public school program which parents are proud of and interests others in Davis, even plenty of less affluent families who look to improve the future prospects of their children. This approximates what Davis has now and can continue to have.
Or you can have a more ordinary school system that operates on the expedient philosphy of warehousing kids on the least possible money without paying adequate attention to help all students succeed.
What Davis has in its schools is “average” in other states, but is really great for the Sacramento area. We currently attract plenty of new residents who believe in the positive benefits of a good education and in what Davis schools have to offer.
This is the most accomodating parcel tax to date — an exemption for seniors, and less than half the parcel assessment for apartments ($4.17/month).
This is a great bargain for a community investment.
Watch the Board claim in the near future that their skillful management and new State funding figures allows them to REDUCE their ASK for a parcel tax to the $80 figure…what a bargin… more political theater.
Watch the Board claim in the near future that their skillful management and new State funding figures allows them to REDUCE their ASK for a parcel tax to the $80 figure…what a bargin… more political theater.
Watch the Board claim in the near future that their skillful management and new State funding figures allows them to REDUCE their ASK for a parcel tax to the $80 figure…what a bargin… more political theater.
Watch the Board claim in the near future that their skillful management and new State funding figures allows them to REDUCE their ASK for a parcel tax to the $80 figure…what a bargin… more political theater.
“crystal ball said…
Watch the Board claim in the near future that their skillful management and new State funding figures allows them to REDUCE their ASK for a parcel tax to the $80 figure…what a bargin… more political theater.”
An example of overthinking the issue from a pathologically skeptical perspective.
“crystal ball said…
Watch the Board claim in the near future that their skillful management and new State funding figures allows them to REDUCE their ASK for a parcel tax to the $80 figure…what a bargin… more political theater.”
An example of overthinking the issue from a pathologically skeptical perspective.
“crystal ball said…
Watch the Board claim in the near future that their skillful management and new State funding figures allows them to REDUCE their ASK for a parcel tax to the $80 figure…what a bargin… more political theater.”
An example of overthinking the issue from a pathologically skeptical perspective.
“crystal ball said…
Watch the Board claim in the near future that their skillful management and new State funding figures allows them to REDUCE their ASK for a parcel tax to the $80 figure…what a bargin… more political theater.”
An example of overthinking the issue from a pathologically skeptical perspective.
Anonymous at 9:50: Where do you get that Rick E has never paid a dime of parcel taxes? He has always paid whatever parcel taxes have been assessed since he has lived and owned a home in Davis. You and BB need to crawl out of the hate gutter and learn how to effectively argue the issues, not attack the personality. Rick E has also always supported school bonds and any other types of school district assessments, even though he does not have and never has had children in school here, so get off the nasty attack re his ripping off some kid’s chance at an education.
His point here is that the school district has made many mistakes with our money, built and opened schools we did not need and then were forced to close much needed Valley Oak and may try to close Emerson, and nearly lost $4.5 million of state funds because of stupidity. For this we reward them with more of our tax dollars? All any one is asking for is some accountability of where the money is going and why.
Anonymous at 9:50: Where do you get that Rick E has never paid a dime of parcel taxes? He has always paid whatever parcel taxes have been assessed since he has lived and owned a home in Davis. You and BB need to crawl out of the hate gutter and learn how to effectively argue the issues, not attack the personality. Rick E has also always supported school bonds and any other types of school district assessments, even though he does not have and never has had children in school here, so get off the nasty attack re his ripping off some kid’s chance at an education.
His point here is that the school district has made many mistakes with our money, built and opened schools we did not need and then were forced to close much needed Valley Oak and may try to close Emerson, and nearly lost $4.5 million of state funds because of stupidity. For this we reward them with more of our tax dollars? All any one is asking for is some accountability of where the money is going and why.
Anonymous at 9:50: Where do you get that Rick E has never paid a dime of parcel taxes? He has always paid whatever parcel taxes have been assessed since he has lived and owned a home in Davis. You and BB need to crawl out of the hate gutter and learn how to effectively argue the issues, not attack the personality. Rick E has also always supported school bonds and any other types of school district assessments, even though he does not have and never has had children in school here, so get off the nasty attack re his ripping off some kid’s chance at an education.
His point here is that the school district has made many mistakes with our money, built and opened schools we did not need and then were forced to close much needed Valley Oak and may try to close Emerson, and nearly lost $4.5 million of state funds because of stupidity. For this we reward them with more of our tax dollars? All any one is asking for is some accountability of where the money is going and why.
Anonymous at 9:50: Where do you get that Rick E has never paid a dime of parcel taxes? He has always paid whatever parcel taxes have been assessed since he has lived and owned a home in Davis. You and BB need to crawl out of the hate gutter and learn how to effectively argue the issues, not attack the personality. Rick E has also always supported school bonds and any other types of school district assessments, even though he does not have and never has had children in school here, so get off the nasty attack re his ripping off some kid’s chance at an education.
His point here is that the school district has made many mistakes with our money, built and opened schools we did not need and then were forced to close much needed Valley Oak and may try to close Emerson, and nearly lost $4.5 million of state funds because of stupidity. For this we reward them with more of our tax dollars? All any one is asking for is some accountability of where the money is going and why.
I just can’t remember what the parcel tax was about when Rick E led the oppostion. I remember it was when Wagstaff was on the council. I wish I could remember what the issue was but I just can’t. What I thought of him at that time was that he was a Jarvis-Gann type of anti tax guy in liberal clothing. I just want people to know where he is coming from.
I thought the post about him never paying taxes was not accurate and resent being associated with it. I’m sure he pays his taxes as best he can. I just think he is not happy about it and wants to pay as little as possible. Me too, by the way, I just don’t think the schools are where we should draw the line. For me local taxes stay in the community and they are dwarfed by the feds who waste it on war, incompetence, cronyism and empire. The worst you can say about the schools is possibly incompetence and cronyism. I just don’t want to punish those that suffer from the foolishness of the leaders past or present.
I just can’t remember what the parcel tax was about when Rick E led the oppostion. I remember it was when Wagstaff was on the council. I wish I could remember what the issue was but I just can’t. What I thought of him at that time was that he was a Jarvis-Gann type of anti tax guy in liberal clothing. I just want people to know where he is coming from.
I thought the post about him never paying taxes was not accurate and resent being associated with it. I’m sure he pays his taxes as best he can. I just think he is not happy about it and wants to pay as little as possible. Me too, by the way, I just don’t think the schools are where we should draw the line. For me local taxes stay in the community and they are dwarfed by the feds who waste it on war, incompetence, cronyism and empire. The worst you can say about the schools is possibly incompetence and cronyism. I just don’t want to punish those that suffer from the foolishness of the leaders past or present.
I just can’t remember what the parcel tax was about when Rick E led the oppostion. I remember it was when Wagstaff was on the council. I wish I could remember what the issue was but I just can’t. What I thought of him at that time was that he was a Jarvis-Gann type of anti tax guy in liberal clothing. I just want people to know where he is coming from.
I thought the post about him never paying taxes was not accurate and resent being associated with it. I’m sure he pays his taxes as best he can. I just think he is not happy about it and wants to pay as little as possible. Me too, by the way, I just don’t think the schools are where we should draw the line. For me local taxes stay in the community and they are dwarfed by the feds who waste it on war, incompetence, cronyism and empire. The worst you can say about the schools is possibly incompetence and cronyism. I just don’t want to punish those that suffer from the foolishness of the leaders past or present.
I just can’t remember what the parcel tax was about when Rick E led the oppostion. I remember it was when Wagstaff was on the council. I wish I could remember what the issue was but I just can’t. What I thought of him at that time was that he was a Jarvis-Gann type of anti tax guy in liberal clothing. I just want people to know where he is coming from.
I thought the post about him never paying taxes was not accurate and resent being associated with it. I’m sure he pays his taxes as best he can. I just think he is not happy about it and wants to pay as little as possible. Me too, by the way, I just don’t think the schools are where we should draw the line. For me local taxes stay in the community and they are dwarfed by the feds who waste it on war, incompetence, cronyism and empire. The worst you can say about the schools is possibly incompetence and cronyism. I just don’t want to punish those that suffer from the foolishness of the leaders past or present.
Really enjoyed reading the heated comments anout the school board’s$120 tax increase on the November ballot. Such passionate exchanges mean that people really care, and that is a positive testament to our sense of community.
But, please, try to focus on the issues, rather than personalities or outright lies about people who oppose this tax for legitimate reasons.
As some supporters of the tax indicated, they thought they knew who Rick E was, and I thought so as well. So I phoned him to get his views first-hand.
Turns out he has lived in Davis for over 35 years, has never missed a property tax payment, and has paid all of the “extra” property tax assessements even though he has never had a child in the Davis School District.
I then asked him whether he had ever opposed parcel taxes in the past, and he replied “yes.” When I asked why, he replied succintly and diretly: “Because parcel taxes are inherently regressive and unfair, and we have approved so many taxes in the past to “permanetly” fix a problem, only to be told that we need to pay more to fix the same problem. That makes no sense.
My overall impression from this interview was that Rick E cares very much about this community and has always paid his fair share (and even more) of taxes to support our schools.
However, he has a major concern that, in my opinion, will determine the fate of the DJUSD parcel tax on the November ballot: How,after making so many alleged poor decisions with the money we have granted them previously, can the DJUSD restore our trust and confidence in them?
As a disinterested observer, I don’t think they can at the $120 level.
Really enjoyed reading the heated comments anout the school board’s$120 tax increase on the November ballot. Such passionate exchanges mean that people really care, and that is a positive testament to our sense of community.
But, please, try to focus on the issues, rather than personalities or outright lies about people who oppose this tax for legitimate reasons.
As some supporters of the tax indicated, they thought they knew who Rick E was, and I thought so as well. So I phoned him to get his views first-hand.
Turns out he has lived in Davis for over 35 years, has never missed a property tax payment, and has paid all of the “extra” property tax assessements even though he has never had a child in the Davis School District.
I then asked him whether he had ever opposed parcel taxes in the past, and he replied “yes.” When I asked why, he replied succintly and diretly: “Because parcel taxes are inherently regressive and unfair, and we have approved so many taxes in the past to “permanetly” fix a problem, only to be told that we need to pay more to fix the same problem. That makes no sense.
My overall impression from this interview was that Rick E cares very much about this community and has always paid his fair share (and even more) of taxes to support our schools.
However, he has a major concern that, in my opinion, will determine the fate of the DJUSD parcel tax on the November ballot: How,after making so many alleged poor decisions with the money we have granted them previously, can the DJUSD restore our trust and confidence in them?
As a disinterested observer, I don’t think they can at the $120 level.
Really enjoyed reading the heated comments anout the school board’s$120 tax increase on the November ballot. Such passionate exchanges mean that people really care, and that is a positive testament to our sense of community.
But, please, try to focus on the issues, rather than personalities or outright lies about people who oppose this tax for legitimate reasons.
As some supporters of the tax indicated, they thought they knew who Rick E was, and I thought so as well. So I phoned him to get his views first-hand.
Turns out he has lived in Davis for over 35 years, has never missed a property tax payment, and has paid all of the “extra” property tax assessements even though he has never had a child in the Davis School District.
I then asked him whether he had ever opposed parcel taxes in the past, and he replied “yes.” When I asked why, he replied succintly and diretly: “Because parcel taxes are inherently regressive and unfair, and we have approved so many taxes in the past to “permanetly” fix a problem, only to be told that we need to pay more to fix the same problem. That makes no sense.
My overall impression from this interview was that Rick E cares very much about this community and has always paid his fair share (and even more) of taxes to support our schools.
However, he has a major concern that, in my opinion, will determine the fate of the DJUSD parcel tax on the November ballot: How,after making so many alleged poor decisions with the money we have granted them previously, can the DJUSD restore our trust and confidence in them?
As a disinterested observer, I don’t think they can at the $120 level.
Really enjoyed reading the heated comments anout the school board’s$120 tax increase on the November ballot. Such passionate exchanges mean that people really care, and that is a positive testament to our sense of community.
But, please, try to focus on the issues, rather than personalities or outright lies about people who oppose this tax for legitimate reasons.
As some supporters of the tax indicated, they thought they knew who Rick E was, and I thought so as well. So I phoned him to get his views first-hand.
Turns out he has lived in Davis for over 35 years, has never missed a property tax payment, and has paid all of the “extra” property tax assessements even though he has never had a child in the Davis School District.
I then asked him whether he had ever opposed parcel taxes in the past, and he replied “yes.” When I asked why, he replied succintly and diretly: “Because parcel taxes are inherently regressive and unfair, and we have approved so many taxes in the past to “permanetly” fix a problem, only to be told that we need to pay more to fix the same problem. That makes no sense.
My overall impression from this interview was that Rick E cares very much about this community and has always paid his fair share (and even more) of taxes to support our schools.
However, he has a major concern that, in my opinion, will determine the fate of the DJUSD parcel tax on the November ballot: How,after making so many alleged poor decisions with the money we have granted them previously, can the DJUSD restore our trust and confidence in them?
As a disinterested observer, I don’t think they can at the $120 level.
The only substantive criticisms of the school district center around poor planning of new schools for populations that didn’t materialize when they were supposed to.
The programs that were proposed for cuts (and those that are on the parcel tax) are those that actually make our schools stand out from neighboring districts and show plenty of positive benefits. For this I am supporting the parcel tax.
The district can gain some trust by acting responsibly with the West Village project that the university proposes and integrate those students into the current schools in the district rather than incorporate yet another elementary school as is proposed in the plans.
We have clear evidence that the district does not need another elementary school, that the district can easily absorb the added population of West Village into the current facilities.
Otherwise, it is really misguided to punish students over poor planning by previous officials.
The only substantive criticisms of the school district center around poor planning of new schools for populations that didn’t materialize when they were supposed to.
The programs that were proposed for cuts (and those that are on the parcel tax) are those that actually make our schools stand out from neighboring districts and show plenty of positive benefits. For this I am supporting the parcel tax.
The district can gain some trust by acting responsibly with the West Village project that the university proposes and integrate those students into the current schools in the district rather than incorporate yet another elementary school as is proposed in the plans.
We have clear evidence that the district does not need another elementary school, that the district can easily absorb the added population of West Village into the current facilities.
Otherwise, it is really misguided to punish students over poor planning by previous officials.
The only substantive criticisms of the school district center around poor planning of new schools for populations that didn’t materialize when they were supposed to.
The programs that were proposed for cuts (and those that are on the parcel tax) are those that actually make our schools stand out from neighboring districts and show plenty of positive benefits. For this I am supporting the parcel tax.
The district can gain some trust by acting responsibly with the West Village project that the university proposes and integrate those students into the current schools in the district rather than incorporate yet another elementary school as is proposed in the plans.
We have clear evidence that the district does not need another elementary school, that the district can easily absorb the added population of West Village into the current facilities.
Otherwise, it is really misguided to punish students over poor planning by previous officials.
The only substantive criticisms of the school district center around poor planning of new schools for populations that didn’t materialize when they were supposed to.
The programs that were proposed for cuts (and those that are on the parcel tax) are those that actually make our schools stand out from neighboring districts and show plenty of positive benefits. For this I am supporting the parcel tax.
The district can gain some trust by acting responsibly with the West Village project that the university proposes and integrate those students into the current schools in the district rather than incorporate yet another elementary school as is proposed in the plans.
We have clear evidence that the district does not need another elementary school, that the district can easily absorb the added population of West Village into the current facilities.
Otherwise, it is really misguided to punish students over poor planning by previous officials.
“The district can gain some trust by acting responsibly with the West Village project that the university proposes and integrate those students into the current schools in the district rather than incorporate yet another elementary school as is proposed in the plans.”
I will almost bet you we will end up with yet another elementary school, and it will be deemed a necessity.
“The district can gain some trust by acting responsibly with the West Village project that the university proposes and integrate those students into the current schools in the district rather than incorporate yet another elementary school as is proposed in the plans.”
I will almost bet you we will end up with yet another elementary school, and it will be deemed a necessity.
“The district can gain some trust by acting responsibly with the West Village project that the university proposes and integrate those students into the current schools in the district rather than incorporate yet another elementary school as is proposed in the plans.”
I will almost bet you we will end up with yet another elementary school, and it will be deemed a necessity.
“The district can gain some trust by acting responsibly with the West Village project that the university proposes and integrate those students into the current schools in the district rather than incorporate yet another elementary school as is proposed in the plans.”
I will almost bet you we will end up with yet another elementary school, and it will be deemed a necessity.
“I will almost bet you we will end up with yet another elementary school, and it will be deemed a necessity.”
First of all West Village is a university project not a city development, so if a school is built then the university will have to deal with it. That said, I do not think that UCD is planing to run an elementary school.
The projection of students expected to come from the West Village project is around 100-150, and I think that maybe K-12, so, despite the desire to project negatively, do not expect a new elementary school.
Those students will most likely be integrated into Patwin which will help the declining West Davis populations. The only problem that I see is that the boundary with Willet may need to be changed because Willet’s enrollment is low. All of which will, I am sure, upset somebody, but our community is ever changing.
The last discussion that I heard about the “school site” on the West Village plans regarded the possibility of a community college and a location for Davinci which is supposed to have access to college resources.
“I will almost bet you we will end up with yet another elementary school, and it will be deemed a necessity.”
First of all West Village is a university project not a city development, so if a school is built then the university will have to deal with it. That said, I do not think that UCD is planing to run an elementary school.
The projection of students expected to come from the West Village project is around 100-150, and I think that maybe K-12, so, despite the desire to project negatively, do not expect a new elementary school.
Those students will most likely be integrated into Patwin which will help the declining West Davis populations. The only problem that I see is that the boundary with Willet may need to be changed because Willet’s enrollment is low. All of which will, I am sure, upset somebody, but our community is ever changing.
The last discussion that I heard about the “school site” on the West Village plans regarded the possibility of a community college and a location for Davinci which is supposed to have access to college resources.
“I will almost bet you we will end up with yet another elementary school, and it will be deemed a necessity.”
First of all West Village is a university project not a city development, so if a school is built then the university will have to deal with it. That said, I do not think that UCD is planing to run an elementary school.
The projection of students expected to come from the West Village project is around 100-150, and I think that maybe K-12, so, despite the desire to project negatively, do not expect a new elementary school.
Those students will most likely be integrated into Patwin which will help the declining West Davis populations. The only problem that I see is that the boundary with Willet may need to be changed because Willet’s enrollment is low. All of which will, I am sure, upset somebody, but our community is ever changing.
The last discussion that I heard about the “school site” on the West Village plans regarded the possibility of a community college and a location for Davinci which is supposed to have access to college resources.
“I will almost bet you we will end up with yet another elementary school, and it will be deemed a necessity.”
First of all West Village is a university project not a city development, so if a school is built then the university will have to deal with it. That said, I do not think that UCD is planing to run an elementary school.
The projection of students expected to come from the West Village project is around 100-150, and I think that maybe K-12, so, despite the desire to project negatively, do not expect a new elementary school.
Those students will most likely be integrated into Patwin which will help the declining West Davis populations. The only problem that I see is that the boundary with Willet may need to be changed because Willet’s enrollment is low. All of which will, I am sure, upset somebody, but our community is ever changing.
The last discussion that I heard about the “school site” on the West Village plans regarded the possibility of a community college and a location for Davinci which is supposed to have access to college resources.
I hope that the university developers have actually consulted with the district, and I hope that the district has laid out clearly to them what the current situation in the district is — that we have just gone through the painful process of closing an elementary school because of misplanning, and that the current budget and enrollment situation do not allow for the district to fund opening another elementary school.
Already I am disappointed to see that “elementary school” is included in their public plans for the project.
It is potential false advertising on their part, and it makes DJUSD look bad from more than one angle.
I hope that the university developers have actually consulted with the district, and I hope that the district has laid out clearly to them what the current situation in the district is — that we have just gone through the painful process of closing an elementary school because of misplanning, and that the current budget and enrollment situation do not allow for the district to fund opening another elementary school.
Already I am disappointed to see that “elementary school” is included in their public plans for the project.
It is potential false advertising on their part, and it makes DJUSD look bad from more than one angle.
I hope that the university developers have actually consulted with the district, and I hope that the district has laid out clearly to them what the current situation in the district is — that we have just gone through the painful process of closing an elementary school because of misplanning, and that the current budget and enrollment situation do not allow for the district to fund opening another elementary school.
Already I am disappointed to see that “elementary school” is included in their public plans for the project.
It is potential false advertising on their part, and it makes DJUSD look bad from more than one angle.
I hope that the university developers have actually consulted with the district, and I hope that the district has laid out clearly to them what the current situation in the district is — that we have just gone through the painful process of closing an elementary school because of misplanning, and that the current budget and enrollment situation do not allow for the district to fund opening another elementary school.
Already I am disappointed to see that “elementary school” is included in their public plans for the project.
It is potential false advertising on their part, and it makes DJUSD look bad from more than one angle.
How on earth can you expect your readers to vote for such a measure, knowing that it would hurt so many people on fixed incomes, unfairly tax both renters and homeowners who live in modest homes or apartments and condone the recent mis-sepending of our hard-earned dollars by the DJUSD?
In other cities I might appear to be solidly middle class. In Davis I’m not so sure. We definitely live in a “modest” home compared to what else is available.
But I emphatically disagree with your assessment that this parcel tax is, overall, a burden to less affluent families. This parcel tax offers the most benefit to less affluent families. If the parcel measure didn’t pass and cuts go into effect, more affluent families will be able to afford the big bucks to supplement what the district no longer provides.
If, for instance, elementary science is cut, I will not necessarily be able to afford the money for enriching courses at the Explorit Science Center to replace that program. Others will not be able to afford music lessons or whatever private tutoring to make up for lost services from the district.
I don’t see how we close the “achievement gap” if the parcel tax doesn’t pass.
So I find this argument (that passing the parcel tax hurts lower income residents) to be rather disingenuous. I am even offended that “Rick E” attempts to represent me in his generalization.
There are plenty of less affluent families who live in Davis specifically for the good schools, and who would not mind paying this assessment, specifically for their kids. If schools didn’t matter to me, then I would definitely live somewhere else, where my income could buy more.
How on earth can you expect your readers to vote for such a measure, knowing that it would hurt so many people on fixed incomes, unfairly tax both renters and homeowners who live in modest homes or apartments and condone the recent mis-sepending of our hard-earned dollars by the DJUSD?
In other cities I might appear to be solidly middle class. In Davis I’m not so sure. We definitely live in a “modest” home compared to what else is available.
But I emphatically disagree with your assessment that this parcel tax is, overall, a burden to less affluent families. This parcel tax offers the most benefit to less affluent families. If the parcel measure didn’t pass and cuts go into effect, more affluent families will be able to afford the big bucks to supplement what the district no longer provides.
If, for instance, elementary science is cut, I will not necessarily be able to afford the money for enriching courses at the Explorit Science Center to replace that program. Others will not be able to afford music lessons or whatever private tutoring to make up for lost services from the district.
I don’t see how we close the “achievement gap” if the parcel tax doesn’t pass.
So I find this argument (that passing the parcel tax hurts lower income residents) to be rather disingenuous. I am even offended that “Rick E” attempts to represent me in his generalization.
There are plenty of less affluent families who live in Davis specifically for the good schools, and who would not mind paying this assessment, specifically for their kids. If schools didn’t matter to me, then I would definitely live somewhere else, where my income could buy more.
How on earth can you expect your readers to vote for such a measure, knowing that it would hurt so many people on fixed incomes, unfairly tax both renters and homeowners who live in modest homes or apartments and condone the recent mis-sepending of our hard-earned dollars by the DJUSD?
In other cities I might appear to be solidly middle class. In Davis I’m not so sure. We definitely live in a “modest” home compared to what else is available.
But I emphatically disagree with your assessment that this parcel tax is, overall, a burden to less affluent families. This parcel tax offers the most benefit to less affluent families. If the parcel measure didn’t pass and cuts go into effect, more affluent families will be able to afford the big bucks to supplement what the district no longer provides.
If, for instance, elementary science is cut, I will not necessarily be able to afford the money for enriching courses at the Explorit Science Center to replace that program. Others will not be able to afford music lessons or whatever private tutoring to make up for lost services from the district.
I don’t see how we close the “achievement gap” if the parcel tax doesn’t pass.
So I find this argument (that passing the parcel tax hurts lower income residents) to be rather disingenuous. I am even offended that “Rick E” attempts to represent me in his generalization.
There are plenty of less affluent families who live in Davis specifically for the good schools, and who would not mind paying this assessment, specifically for their kids. If schools didn’t matter to me, then I would definitely live somewhere else, where my income could buy more.
How on earth can you expect your readers to vote for such a measure, knowing that it would hurt so many people on fixed incomes, unfairly tax both renters and homeowners who live in modest homes or apartments and condone the recent mis-sepending of our hard-earned dollars by the DJUSD?
In other cities I might appear to be solidly middle class. In Davis I’m not so sure. We definitely live in a “modest” home compared to what else is available.
But I emphatically disagree with your assessment that this parcel tax is, overall, a burden to less affluent families. This parcel tax offers the most benefit to less affluent families. If the parcel measure didn’t pass and cuts go into effect, more affluent families will be able to afford the big bucks to supplement what the district no longer provides.
If, for instance, elementary science is cut, I will not necessarily be able to afford the money for enriching courses at the Explorit Science Center to replace that program. Others will not be able to afford music lessons or whatever private tutoring to make up for lost services from the district.
I don’t see how we close the “achievement gap” if the parcel tax doesn’t pass.
So I find this argument (that passing the parcel tax hurts lower income residents) to be rather disingenuous. I am even offended that “Rick E” attempts to represent me in his generalization.
There are plenty of less affluent families who live in Davis specifically for the good schools, and who would not mind paying this assessment, specifically for their kids. If schools didn’t matter to me, then I would definitely live somewhere else, where my income could buy more.