Teachers Endorse Yes on H, Lovenburg, Fernandes

teacher(From Press Release) – The Davis Teachers Association is pleased to announce the results of our endorsement process for the fall 2016 November election. With over 92 percent of the vote in favor, DTA has endorsed Measure H. The measure will provide funding to protect the jobs of many valued educators and the learning they produce everyday with the students they serve. The opportunities that the parcel tax affords the students of Davis are part of what make the DJUSD the outstanding district it is.

DTA President, Blair Howard, says that “the Association looks forward to working for the passage of the measure, as well as continuing to advocate at all levels for better funding for all public schools, including Davis Joint Unified.”

The educators of Davis have also voted to endorse both Alan Fernandes and Susan Lovenburg for the two school trustee positions in the November 2016 election. Both candidates have shown through their years of service to the district that they do the hard work of becoming educated on the issues facing the district, that they consider the many sides to each issue, and that they dedicate themselves to ensuring the future stability of the DJUSD.

DTA endorsed Alan in 2012 and 2014 because he has consistently listened to the many voices on the issues facing the district and made decisions to move the district forward, and we continue to support him in his service of the district.

“Alan has been a passionate voice for all stakeholders in the district, and as educators we value his trust in us as the professionals to make decisions and provide input that will support the students we work with everyday. I have enjoyed working with Alan on the Strategic Planning Committee and as a Board member and respect the work he has done. Alan has always sought the honest opinion of the educators of the district” notes Blair Howard.

We are also excited to endorse for the first time Susan Lovenberg. DTA has always respected the time and consideration Susan has put into her work on the board, and even if our perspectives differed, it was done with with respect.

President Blair Howard states that “DTA has chosen to endorse Susan because of what she has accomplished, but also because she has identified the looming teacher shortage as a top issue and acknowledges that while steps have been made to address it, more work needs to be done to to effectively attract and retain top quality employees. Susan tackles tough issues knowing that they may not lead to solutions that please everybody, but strives to do what is best for all students in the district.”

Both candidates are familiar with the issues facing the district, understand the dynamics, and are committed to moving the district forward, which is why the membership voted strongly to endorse them. We are happy to join with the classified staff of the DJUSD represented by CSEA in endorsing these two great candidates. DTA looks forward to engaging with the community to make the case for the reelection of Alan and Susan.

Author

Categories:

Breaking News DJUSD Elections

Tags:

91 comments

  1. With over 92 percent of the vote in favor, DTA has endorsed Measure H.

    Big surprise, why wasn’t the vote 100%?  Did the other 8% vote no because they were unhappy the board didn’t try to extract a higher amount from homeowners?

     

     

     

        1. That’s my point, as I stated I’m surprised it wasn’t 100% unless the 8% that voted no wanted even more. So the DTA supporting a school parcel tax really doesn’t mean anything because that’s what everyone would expect them to do.

        2. The DTA gets the money and many or most of their members do not live in Davis and therefore don’t pay the tax. To them it is free money. Getting more back than you pay out has high popularity in all groups.

        3. The current financial situation is brought to us by the CTA. They made the determination that it is easier to steal money from poor districts which was the motive force behind the LCFF. Turns out they were right.

          1. No actually they are different. The sales tax is a general tax and can be used for any purpose. A parcel tax is a specific tax that can only be used for designated purposes.

        4. Parcel tax money doesn’t go towards higher salaries

          Oh please, it all adds to the pot so maybe technically parcel tax money doesn’t go towards higher salaries but if the schools didn’t get the parcel tax funds you can bet that salaries would suffer and there would be lesser teaching positions.  So to say that parcel taxes don’t go towards higher salaries is naive at best.  Teachers will always be in favor of higher school parcel taxes so to write an article stating they support Measure H like it some kind of huge endorsement is like saying bees support honey.

        5. Quielo:
          You stated this:

          The DTA gets the money and many or most of their members do not live in Davis and therefore don’t pay the tax. To them it is free money. Getting more back than you pay out has high popularity in all groups.

          (Full disclosure – I am a music teacher and DTA Site Representative, as well as on the Measure H Community Committee as I am a Davis resident and homeowner)

          Parcel tax money go directly to pay for specific programs as noted by the school district and Measure H Campaign. These monies do not go to increased salaries for us, nor increased benefits. The proof is on http://www.districtdollars.org, and can be found in the reports done by the Parcel Tax Oversight Committee. The most recent report is here: http://www.djusd.net/file/1368362980686/1376458807489/9022121806930502672.pdf and you can find reports for previous years if you search “parcel tax oversight” into the search box at http://www.djusd.net

          No Measure H monies will go toward higher salaries, benefits, etc; they go directly toward the funding of programs that otherwise would not be funded.

          You also state this:

          The current financial situation is brought to us by the CTA.

          This is your opinion. If you have a fact or facts to back up this claim (that the CTA, aka, the teachers of California, are the reason why we have funding problems in the schools), please show your proof and explain your point with facts.

          To respond further to the state’s and schools’ funding troubles, here is what I have learned: The biggest and most impacting reason we have funding trouble now is due to the loss of funds during the Great Recession through greatly reduced state income for those years. Further we did not, due to the LCFF, end up with a larger portion of new monies, due to our student population here in town. We could also tribute Ca’s original school funding issues to the enactment of Prop. 13, which led to the first Parcel Tax being passed back in 1984.

          Between those two things (add in there Prop 13’s funding losses), and without the parcel tax, the DJUSD would be funded around $1300 less per student than is the state average. (Numbers come from the DJUSD presentation about the Parcel Tax here on page 6: http://djusd-ca.schoolloop.com/file/1368362980686/1403330976221/5333178086391953111.pdf).

           

           

           

           

           

           

           

        6. BP, you state this:

          but if the schools didn’t get the parcel tax funds you can bet that salaries would suffer

          This is about the farthest thing from the truth. Salaries are contracted and agreed upon by the district and union, approved by the board. For salaries to be reduced at any point, the union and district must communally agree to it. It has nothing to do with passage of parcel taxes.

          To suggest that failure of the parcel tax will lower people’s salaries as a backhanded way to suggest that the parcel tax goes to increased salaries is false and completely misleading.

           

           

           

      1. As to where money is spent… the parcel tax monies have to be used for the specified purposes… yet that can free up money from the unrestricted sources… accountants can make the numbers say what they want to…

        So, $1 million on parcel tax revenue can free up same amount in ‘general fund’, which can be used for salary increases or any other purpose…

        1. hpierce:

          You state this:

          As to where money is spent… the parcel tax monies have to be used for the specified purposes… yet that can free up money from the unrestricted sources… accountants can make the numbers say what they want to…

          So, $1 million on parcel tax revenue can free up same amount in ‘general fund’, which can be used for salary increases or any other purpose…

          This is not true. Parcel Tax funds do not go to programs or other aspects of the district currently funded through state funding (ie, replacing that funding). They to directly to programs not funded through the monies received from the State of Ca or Federal Govt, that would otherwise have been lost years ago.

           

        2. Greg… I’ll stand corrected, IF you can point me to verifiable info that shows that no funds (as in zero) are expended from the GF that go towards the same programs that the parcel taxes fund.

        3. hpierce,

          Please check the oversight committee’s reports and http://www.districtdollars.org as I posted above to see more information on how the money is spent and if parcel tax dollars are being spent appropriately as per the board resolution. You can see on the district website’s fact sheet and webpages which programs and which parts of programs the parcel tax funding goes toward. I would encourage you to check out those websites and reports, and I would encourage you to speak to Mr. Poppenga, who is currently on the Oversight Committee. He can inform you that the money is spent as it should be, as he posted in a short piece here some months ago. You can do a search to find that piece.

           

           

           

        4. None of the money goes to raises because the raises were already approved by the last union contract before the parcel tax vote. So the District needs more money to pay the higher salaries they have already approved, but the money is going to other things somehow.

          So Greg, if H fails are the worst teachers going to get laid off or the newer better more enthuastic ones? Can’t see why the District has problems hiring newer better enthuastic teachers. Must be the pay.

        5. Sam, the layoff process is purely by seniority overall as an elementary teacher, and seniority by dept as a secondary teacher. Layoffs have nothing to do with teaching ability.

        6. and parcel taxes have nothing to do with wages, they are negotiated separately.

          why are you guys worried about what a tiny minority of teachers say, 8% has generated this whole discussion that moved off the more important issue of who the dta endorsed and why they ignored poppenga.

        7. ” Layoffs have nothing to do with teaching ability,” With the flood of LCFF money many districts are justifying raises as in the best interest of the kids. None that I have seen have laid off the teachers hired at the previous pay scale. 

           

          If the previous pay scale prevented them from hiring qualified help why don’t they get rid of those incompetents now that they can pay more?

        8. “you are assuming there are incompetents” The districts receiving LCFF grants could use the money to reduce class size, hire tutors, lengthen the school year, et. Instead they choose to pay existing employees more and claim that the increased compensation is needed to “attract and retain good teachers”.This certainly implies that the teachers hired under the old scale are incompetent.

        9. …why they ignored poppenga.

          DavisProgressive,

          stating that the DTA “ignored” poppenga is quite a strong charge depending on what you mean by ignored. can you please clarify “ignored?”

          I will tell you that all four candidates received the same opportunity and access as far as I’ve seen it. No candidate was left out, given more time/access, or prevented from equal access and time.

           

           

      2. “92% is a pretty large majority, there are always outliers.”

        Strangely enough, 92% is almost the same percentage of PhDs who identify as liberal. (That other 8% must have great early education experiences to get that far.).

    1. BP wrote:

      > why wasn’t the vote 100%?

      Maybe 8% of the teachers that plan to retire soon live in town and are not old enough to get the senior exemption from the parcel tax?

      1. Some DTA members have commented that they feel that school parcel taxes are not a stable form of school funding.  Problem is, I’m not sure that there is any more stable funding that is available.  At least none other has been proposed.

  2. Really disappointed in DTA.  I would think they would endorse all three. Is there really a huge difference between Poppenga and the other two and if so, I would like to hear it.