by Delaine Eastin –
I think this town gets it. We have a lower crime rate. When a recession hits, our homes retain more of their value than some surrounding communities. We have neighborhoods where people look out for each other. Much of this value added is because we have the best schools in a 10 county region.
Called Measure A, this parcel tax is really a form of homeowner’s insurance, such that we ensure the quality of Davis schools despite the horrific cuts that most school districts across California have faced and are facing. There is a reason for everyone to get behind Measure A. It is patriotic. It is common sense. It is about leadership for a better tomorrow for every individual child as well as for the overall community.
With this parcel tax, we will be able to retain science and history in our curriculum. (Across California, in too many districts, science and history are only taught in the in the two grades for which there is a state test!) Passing the parcel tax, will allow us to retain counselors. (California is dead last in the number of counselors per student overall.)
Measure A will allow us to have reduced class size in K-6 and in high school English and math. (California now has the largest class size in the U.S. overall.) This parcel tax also allows us to retain elective course offerings, including but not limited to foreign language and music. (In too many communities the school year is being shortened and the school day is being reduced leaving no opportunity for so-called electives.)
Neil Postman once said, “Children are a message we send to a time we will never see.”
I got this far in life because my parents bought a smaller house that cost more than they could have bought in a neighboring community. They did this because the schools of the community they selected were better.
That was a life changing decision they made on my behalf. They are no longer here to see this time in which we live.
I think they would be proud of their whole generation coming out of depression and war dreaming of a better life for their children and acting on those dreams.
I hope we can say the same, if not for our whole state and nation, at least for our community. In the meantime, seniors who are 65 or older are able to receive a full exemption from this tax if they so choose.
In Davis, we have a noble tradition of being for education and for children. Most Democrats, Republicans and Independents vote in the tradition of education minded Presidents like FDR and Ike, of Governors like Democrat Pat Brown and Republican Earl Warren. Please keep up that tradition.
Let us earn an A by passing Measure A. This is not a community that should settle for basic education and a C grade, which in a global economy will morph into an F for failure very fast. Step up by investing in tomorrow. And neighbors, if your optimism is sagging, you should spend more time around children. You see children are naturally optimistic.
I believe in them and you should too.
In the meantime, we need your vote between April 4th and May 3rd on a mail-in ballot.
This is a 2/3rds vote requirement, so we need twice as many folks to say yes as we have folks who say no.
Every vote matters. Please stand up and be counted for the little ones who are still learning to count.
Delaine Eastin is a former California Superintendent of Public Instruction and Davis Resident
Well said!
Delaine Eastin:
You opposed reforms and higher standards while you were California Superintendent of Public Instruction. Your legacy in this position was one of opposing improvements in the California state standards. You bear a good share of the responsibility for our miserable record of educating California’s children. You have no credibility on this issue.
Your endorsement of Measure A carries no weight at all.
Regardless what you think of her as a person and what she has done, her arguments are valid. Richard Nixon could have said the same thing and it would have been just as valid.
So if this third school bond passes how soon will it be before a fourth new school bond is proposed? Voters are getting fed up.
Davis test scores have been strong relative to other districts in Yolo County and the Sacramento region for the last 50-60 years, despite the fact that we hire teachers and administrators from the same pool as all other nearby districts.
Why have we consistently been so strong? In my opinion, it is because of the academically oriented parents in our district. The parents are the ones who have demanded excellence from their children and from their children’s teachers.
At the very same time, we are faced with a Davis Teachers Association which, like its union counterparts up and down the state, refuses to hire, retain, promote and pay teachers based on their effectiveness in the classroom.
[i]”Let us earn an A by passing Measure A. This is not a community that should settle for basic education and a C grade, which in a global economy will morph into an F for failure very fast.”[/i]
Delaine Eastin wants us to give all teachers and admins more tax money. She wants us to earn an A. She wants to grade the district; and she wants teachers to grade students. But she wants no test for teacher effectiveness to determine how much teachers earn.
I don’t know if that inconsistency is enough to drive a no vote. But it is terribly ironic that the DTA and the CTA seem to think that we will get an F without more money, but they refuse to be graded themselves.
Rifkin and Rusty, the teaching profession probably has as much dead wood as any other profession, not more, and it would be nice to have a more efficient way of getting rid of it. But the reality of the situation facing our community NOW is that many of the things that make Davis schools fantastic — music, athletics, field trips to Catalina, etc. — will be gone if Measure A doesn’t pass, but all the things you complain of will still be there. Rusty, this is one voter who is not getting fed up. Speak for yourself–you don’t speak for all of us.
I agree with rich rifkin. The primary reason Davis Schools do so well is because many of the parents in Davis work for the university, thus they will hold their children accountable for good grades, not the so called excellence of davis schools.
Having said that, there is nothing in this diatribe which talks about accountability with this money. And the reason that happens is because miss Epstein knows the Davis voters will support this bond no matter what, so she feels no reason to have to justify this bond.
“Rusty, this is one voter who is not getting fed up. Speak for yourself–you don’t speak for all of us.”
Who aid I was speaking for you? I said “voters”, not “all voters”.
Sorry but I can’t help not feeling bad that “field trips to Catalina” might be gone if this bond doesn’t pass. I’m sure there’s many more examples of waste that can be trimmed.
Rifkin: [i]Delaine Eastin wants us to give all teachers and admins more tax money.[/i]
Ms. Eastin isn’t arguing for [b]more[/b] money for schools. She is arguing for sustaining funding that the legislature has cut.
The Republicans in the legislature want to cut taxes and hence cut funding for all K-12 schools. We had a chance to vote on tax extensions that would have sustained funding for schools. I wanted a chance to vote on that. Polls showed that California voters supported not cutting funding for K-12 education and extending those state taxes. Gov. Brown ran and won on the idea of allowing California voters to have that chance.
With this measure, we will get a chance to make that decision.
Relative to other districts, DJUSD makes the best use of money for teaching.
[i]we hire teachers and administrators from the same pool as all other nearby districts.[/i]
That’s not quite true. DJUSD typically hires from a more experienced applicant pool than do most other districts. There is a difference in effectiveness for someone in their first year of teaching vs. someone in their fifth or sixth year. It has been regularly documented that roughly half the teachers who start quit within 3-5 years, mainly due to burnout.
Based on DJUSD’s typical hiring pool, most of those teachers have passed that burnout threshold. That is one reason that Davis schools perform well.
[i]But she wants no test for teacher effectiveness to determine how much teachers earn.[/i]
And how will that teacher effectiveness be determined? By standardized testing. We already rely too much on standardized testing, to the point of diminishing returns. School budget cuts are made based on state standardized testing. Courses that get tested don’t get cut. Those that aren’t tested get cut. That’s why music, athletics, art, vocational programs tend to get cut (as will happen next year in Davis without this parcel tax).
What gets cut are programs that substantially improve the environment for student learning. If you provide a good environment for students, learning will take place. If you degrade the environment for students, then you will have an institution that is only marginally better than juvenile detention.
“It has been regularly documented that roughly half the teachers who start quit within 3-5 years, mainly due to burnout.
Based on DJUSD’s typical hiring pool, most of those teachers have passed that burnout threshold. That is one reason that Davis schools perform well.”
I totally disagree with this statement. My daughter is a high school English teacher and she says some of the best teachers are the new ones. They’re fresh with lots of energy and new ideas. She says some of the worst are the older tenured teachers that are just going through the motions and doing as little as they have to to get by.
We have not yet decided how to vote on this measure. Our concern is that given the furloughs state & some local employees are experiencing, the local DTA has asked to have their token contributions to the crisis “erased”. [b]Unless[/b] teachers, classified, and administrators agree to come to the plate, I have a hard time supporting a measure that, while of shorter duration than the other option considered, actually is at a higher rate. $200 will not make/break us. To paraphrase something I’ve heard, “It’s not that I disliked the schools, it was just the principle of the thing.” We have voted yes for each school measure up to this point (since arriving in Davis decades ago). I believe that absent commitments from staff, at all levels, to help bear the sacrifices, the measure may well get a 66.0% yes vote… and FAIL.
[i]I believe that absent commitments from staff, at all levels, to help bear the sacrifices[/i]
Staff at all levels have taken cuts and taken an increased burden — including larger classes, less help from para-educators, assistants, secretaries, etc.
To wdf: and how is that different from state and local employees who are dealing with all of that AND many more furlough days (reduction in pay) than DJUSD (that DTA is on record as saying they want back)?
$ 20 dollars per year for apartment dwellers , at least thats more than they pay for water .
[i]”But the reality of the situation facing our community NOW is that many of the things that make Davis schools fantastic — music, athletics, field trips to Catalina, etc. — will be gone if Measure A doesn’t pass, but all the things you complain of will still be there.”[/i]
It’s important to recognize that since 2005-06 when we gave the teachers and other union employees substantial raises and then in the period since 2008-09 when state and local tax funds began to decline, the Davis school district has had two principal options, not just one:
On the one hand, they could maintain the salaries of all employees and lay off 5-10% of those who they viewed as the least valuable; or on the other hand they could have kept everyone employed–and hence kept all of those programs and activities many view as “fantastic”–by reducing the pay and benefits of all teachers and other employees by 5-10% in alignment with the revenues.
It has been the policy of the Davis school board to follow the former course, not the latter. I think, in the main, that choice exposes the lack of courage to fight for the children of the district and the political power of the DTA.
A few years ago, when Richard Harris requested just a small cut in pay–I think it was 2%–so that we could retain 100% of our classroom teachers, the DTA kicked sand in his face.
I don’t argue that our good teachers are overpaid. When teacher pay is compared to the compensation of many jobs at the City and County, the good teachers are clearly underpaid, now. I don’t want teachers to have to take a pay cut. It just seems to me, in this deep recession, better than the alternative of laying off needed personnel.
It is true that a tax hike could assauge the problem. But it must be understood that in a climate of rapidly rising water and sewer bills in Davis, in light of the large number of additional taxes we are already paying for public safety, the higher sales tax, the parks tax and the very stiff library tax, combined with the fact that most other private and public sector workers in Davis have been facing cutbacks in pay or benefits or hours, it is a bad time for the DJUSD to say, ‘you need to pay more now to keep in place programs and class sizes,’ when the district has always had the option of cutting back in all areas on a percentage basis.
[i]Sorry but I can’t help not feeling bad that “field trips to Catalina” might be gone if this bond doesn’t pass. I’m sure there’s many more examples of waste that can be trimmed.[/i]
Field trips are not district funded. They are funded by donations and parent contributions. They have not been funded by the district for many years.
This is a field trip that has been run by the zoology/botany class at the high school. If parents of those students felt that it was too much to pay for that trip, then the teacher would readily forego it. It may yet happen. As it is, that field trip isn’t a junket. If students enjoy it, great. It just so happens that many of the concepts covered in that class are best seen in nature. There happens to be a marine lab in Catalina where they investigate many of those concepts. Hence the field trip.
More responses and clarifications later…
“Field trips are not district funded. They are funded by donations and parent contributions. They have not been funded by the district for many years.”
wdf1, then why did you write this?
“But the reality of the situation facing our community NOW is that many of the things that make Davis schools fantastic — music, athletics, field trips to Catalina, etc. — will be gone if Measure A doesn’t pass”
Rich: [i]”I don’t want teachers to have to take a pay cut. It just seems to me, in this deep recession, better than the alternative of laying off needed personnel.”[/i]
Somebody with inside knowledge could clarify this, but I think the DTA took a vote on that option a couple of years ago. It would also be very useful to this election if DTA members or officers would state clearly what their position is about the use of these funds, should the tax measure pass.
I’m surmising that if the current school measure passes, and if the DJUSD employees get salary increases beyond nominal CPI, a renewal of the Parks Tax, at ANY level, will not be a ‘happening thing’. It may be dicey already.
rusty49: [i]wdf1, then why did you write this?
“But the reality of the situation facing our community NOW is that many of the things that make Davis schools fantastic — music, athletics, field trips to Catalina, etc. — will be gone if Measure A doesn’t pass”[/i]
I didn’t write that. That comment belongs to Observer at 8:20 AM.
[i]I don’t argue that our good teachers are overpaid. When teacher pay is compared to the compensation of many jobs at the City and County, the good teachers are clearly underpaid, now.[/i]
Davis salaries are based on what neighboring districts offer. If Davis salaries are too low, then DJUSD loses its teachers or is unable to attract as big or good a pool of teachers. As it is, many neighboring districts have had to raise their salaries and benefits above what DJUSD offers to keep their teachers from jumping ship and working in Davis.
Many teachers find it desirable to teach in Davis because they live here, the parent support is greater, and students respond a little more readily to instruction.
What DJUSD offers is comparable, and mostly slightly less than what neighboring districts offer. Again, compared to most other school districts, DJUSD gets a pretty good deal for its money.
Rifkin: “It’s important to recognize that since 2005-06 when we gave the teachers and other union employees substantial raises and then in the period since 2008-09 when state and local tax funds began to decline, the Davis school district has had two principal options, not just one:
On the one hand, they could maintain the salaries of all employees and lay off 5-10% of those who they viewed as the least valuable; or on the other hand they could have kept everyone employed–and hence kept all of those programs and activities many view as “fantastic”–by reducing the pay and benefits of all teachers and other employees by 5-10% in alignment with the revenues.
It has been the policy of the Davis school board to follow the former course, not the latter. I think, in the main, that choice exposes the lack of courage to fight for the children of the district and the political power of the DTA.
A few years ago, when Richard Harris requested just a small cut in pay–I think it was 2%–so that we could retain 100% of our classroom teachers, the DTA kicked sand in his face.
I don’t argue that our good teachers are overpaid. When teacher pay is compared to the compensation of many jobs at the City and County, the good teachers are clearly underpaid, now. I don’t want teachers to have to take a pay cut. It just seems to me, in this deep recession, better than the alternative of laying off needed personnel.
It is true that a tax hike could assauge the problem. But it must be understood that in a climate of rapidly rising water and sewer bills in Davis, in light of the large number of additional taxes we are already paying for public safety, the higher sales tax, the parks tax and the very stiff library tax, combined with the fact that most other private and public sector workers in Davis have been facing cutbacks in pay or benefits or hours, it is a bad time for the DJUSD to say, ‘you need to pay more now to keep in place programs and class sizes,’ when the district has always had the option of cutting back in all areas on a percentage basis.”
Very, very well said.
Don Shor: “Somebody with inside knowledge could clarify this, but I think the DTA took a vote on that option a couple of years ago. It would also be very useful to this election if DTA members or officers would state clearly what their position is about the use of these funds, should the tax measure pass.”
Point well taken.
Rifkin: [i]it is a bad time for the DJUSD to say, ‘you need to pay more now to keep in place programs and class sizes,’ when the district has always had the option of cutting back in all areas on a percentage basis.[/i]
Yes, it is a bad time. The district has been cutting back in all areas on a percentage basis for the past three years. The district has developed a budget that plans to further cutbacks on a percentage basis next year and the year after. State and federal funding formulas do not favor DJUSD relative to other districts. Even after local parcel taxes are considered DJUSD still has below average funding. We are at the point of losing what would distinguish Davis schools from those of other districts. When that happens, then living in Davis isn’t as attractive to newer families. You reach a point where it might be more economical to buy a house in Sacramento and pay the extra money to send your kid to a private school, which still have small class sizes, sports, music, etc. Then housing values decline.
When I’ve spoken with several real estate agents, they have universally agreed that the quality of schools are a heavy factor that influence local housing prices.
Kane607: [i]I agree with rich rifkin. The primary reason Davis Schools do so well is because many of the parents in Davis work for the university, thus they will hold their children accountable for good grades, not the so called excellence of davis schools.[/i]
Not all parents in Davis work for the university, and not all university employees live in Davis and send their kids to Davis schools. If you cut back Davis schools enough, then newer faculty might choose to live elsewhere or choose a job at another institution. As it is, I know of UCD employees/faculty who live in SF and the Bay Area, including Lafayette and Piedmont (which actually all fund their schools at higher rates). University parents still want good schools for their kids. If the Davis community doesn’t care to support good schools, then potential future residents won’t care to move here.
The way you and Rifkin argue it, you’d think you could just do away with Davis schools altogether, because you practically argue that it makes no difference; Davis kids would somehow do well. That is a position, but I don’t think you attract new residents and businesses to Davis with that view.
I don’t take that view. I have seen Davis teachers make a positive difference in how well students do. Davis has good teachers.
“I didn’t write that. That comment belongs to Observer at 8:20 AM.”
My apologies.
wdf1: “The way you and Rifkin argue it, you’d think you could just do away with Davis schools altogether, because you practically argue that it makes no difference; Davis kids would somehow do well. That is a position, but I don’t think you attract new residents and businesses to Davis with that view. I don’t take that view. I have seen Davis teachers make a positive difference in how well students do. Davis has good teachers.”
I think what is being argued is that the “excellence” of Davis schools may have more to do with students coming from well educated backgrounds where education is considered a top priority, rather than how much money is spent on Davis schools. My kids have had good teachers and not so good teachers in the Davis schools. And the poor teachers/administrators have outweighed the good ones, quite frankly. Particularly the administrators. Just anecdotal/personal experience. I agree w Don Shor’s point – DJUSD need to be very, very specific as to what the funding for Measure A is going to be spent on. Will it save the DJUSD high school band for instance. Without it, will the DJUSD high school band go away? If that specificity is out there, please provide the link… thanks…
Thank you Ms. Eastin for your thoughtful article. As a parent of two children currently enrolled in Davis schools, I appreciate your support. I hope that readers take your words to heart.
Delaine , your a hotty !
Kane607: [i]Having said that, there is nothing in this diatribe which talks about accountability with this money. And the reason that happens is because miss Epstein knows the Davis voters will support this bond no matter what, so she feels no reason to have to justify this bond.[/i]
Lack of knowledge is not lack of district accountability, all funds are tediously accounted and reported. There is a citizen oversight committee, there are several public documents that update the finances of the district throughout the year. They are reported to the Yolo County Office of Education and to the state. There is an independent auditor who comes in every year to review the district budget.
Budget issues and updates are regularly discussed in public school board meetings. You can stand up during public comments time to ask your questions. If standing up in public is too much for a shy person, you can e-mail your questions to district staff and school board members. They will either ask the question at the meeting (without attributing it to you by name) or answer you directly by e-mail. You can contact Mr. Bruce Colby at the district office in charge of business services, who oversees the district budget. District staff are generally open to queries from the public, even as they deal with more limited staff and increased responsibilities.
Measure A broadcast statements at Davis Media Access:
[url]http://davismedia.org/content/measure-statements[/url]
Eastin made one comment that I think should be at the core of our decision making when deciding our vote om this measure.
“They did this because the schools of the community they selected were better. That was a life changing decision they made on my behalf.”
What we are deciding here is about the experience that the children who are currently in grades 1-12 will have in our public schools.
I am hearing a lot of anger and disgust in some of the posts about the over all amount of taxes we pay or some administrator or union officials bad past decision making. While this may be warranted, it does not alter the fact that the adverse consequences of the financial impacts of a negative vote will be felt primarily by the children. I am very grateful to the residents of Davis who chose consistently to support the schools during the years prior to my decision to locate here, largely for the schools and to maintain their strength during the 15 years that my children were in the public school system. I feel very strongly that it is my responsibility to give back the same support for the current group of students.
This is not a theoretical debate about big or small government. It is not a rhetorical issue about the relative benefits of lower or higher taxes.
The question is, for the next few years, do we believe in maintaining the level of public school service for the current students as previous years have benefited from ? I sincerely hope that the answer to this question from the majority needed will be “yes”.
[i]Will it save the DJUSD high school band for instance. Without it, will the DJUSD high school band go away? If that specificity is out there, please provide the link… thanks…[/i]
High school band is not proposed to be cut next year in response to lack of funds. A good amount of secondary cuts are coming due to a proposal to eliminate 7th period for 7th and 8th graders. You can look at the Feb. 17 board meeting, agenda item V. b., it lists specifically what would be cut due to that change. The problem with being too specific is that ultimately what is offered in 7th and 8th grade for 7th period is enrollment driven. If enough students sign up for a given course, then the district arranges to offer however many sections would fill that need.
If the district were too specific, then it would find itself committed to offering, for instance, more language classes than it needed to, but then perhaps not enough music classes (or vice versa), all because the parcel tax locked them into spending funds a certain way.