As I have argued this is completely illogical. I will break down that illogic shortly. I would submit to the readers of this, that if you want Emerson to close, then you should vote against Measure W, because voting against Measure W will almost surely lead to the closure of the school. If you want to strongly increase the likelihood of Emerson remaining open, and these are the words of Superintendent James Hammond whom I will quote fully below, then you should vote for the Parcel Tax.
I will get to those words of the Superintendent in a moment. First we need to logic through this argument.
Why Emerson Closes if Measure W Fails
The school district last spring estimated that the closure of Measure W would save the district roughly $600,000 in site specific operating expenses. That is largely without the lay off of teachers.
That is the biggest single chunk of money that can be saved with terminating or eliminating teacher positions. In fact, that represents around a quarter of the money that they would need to cut if Measure W fails.
If given the choice between teachers and a facility, they are going to pick the facility every time. (I will get to why they eliminated Emerson for this list last spring below).
The problem that you face when you have a number like $2.4 million is that you really cannot nickel and dime your way to budget cuts. They have already trimmed two major positions from the district’s administration including an Assistant Superintendent whose contract was not renewed and whose position was not replaced.
The good news for the district is that 82% of the district’s discretionary general fund budget goes directly to the classroom, but the bad news is the same. It means to get meaningful cuts, you have to cut from the classroom. Of the remaining 18% of the budget that does not directly go to the classroom, 9% of the budget goes to ground operations such as custodians and only 7% of the budget goes to administration.
That means you are either cutting teachers or you cutting facilities. Again, that means if you have to cut $2.4 million and can get a quarter of that without laying off a single teacher, guess what they do?
So by all means, if you want to have Emerson close, vote no on W. The illogic of people who say because they won’t guarantee Emerson stays open if W passes, they will therefore vote against W and ensure that Emerson closes, is mindboggling.
Why Emerson Stays Open if Measure W Passes
There are issues of the facility that will prevent the guarantee of Emerson staying open. But, most available rationale indicates that it most likely has to stay open if the general fund is not in deficit.
People try to link Emerson and Valley Oak. But Emerson has advantages (many of them) that Valley Oak never had.
As Superintendent James Hammond said on the Vanguard Radio show in mid-October:
“It’s not like the closure of an elementary school where you have eight or nine sites, you have three junior high sites spread across town, so you have logistical concerns to evaluate.”
This is not a defense of closing Valley Oak, but when they had to close Valley Oak, you have at least three schools within close proximity to Valley Oak. North Davis Elementary and Birch Lane are both within nine-tenths of a mile and Korematsu is just one and a half miles. That means that you are generally redirecting students within a relative close proximity. Now as we know from the Valley Oak issue that arose last year, you are still putting a burden on parents and making it more difficult for young children to walk and bike to school. Nevertheless, it is not a logistical nightmare for the district.
On the other hand, the Junior High scenario is much more tricky. You have Holmes Junior High a full 3.3 miles from Emerson. That is a logistical nightmare in a school district that does not have district busing transportation. That reason alone is why the district held off on closing Emerson as a possibility last spring and why it will likely not close it in the future if there are funds.
And remember they cannot simply move all of the Emerson students to Holmes, they would have to move a good portion of Holmes students to Harper, another two miles away.
So unlike having a simple situation where a few relatively close elementary schools can absorb additional students, you have a tough scenario where you are moving a large amount of students a good distance away.
These logistical problems relegate Emerson to a worst-case scenario closure rather than a likely closure if the general fund is in relatively good condition.
I pressed Superintendent Hammond on this issue during the October 15 radio show. Here’s what he told me.
“The status on Emerson, to be quite honest, right now there is no decision. I mean we are status quo. There has been no formal discussion about Emerson between the staff and the board since last spring… Emerson has challenges but it doesn’t mean there’s an imminent closure waiting for it. There’s facility concerns. It’s not like the closure of an elementary school where you have eight or nine sites, you have three junior high sites spread across town, so you have logistical concerns to evaluate, facility concerns to evaluate. But by no means is there any type of hidden agenda to close the school. I think that that is one of the things even after passing the budget that we still deal with today.”
Thus he completely denies that there is any kind of hidden agenda. On the other hand he cannot make promises.
“I can’t make any promises as a superintendent particularly when it comes to the instability of the state budget and the inadequacy of how schools are funded.”
He lays it out pretty clearly here, he believes that if we get the funding, the “likelihood” of Emerson staying open increases. And if we do not get the funding, the “likelihood” of closure increases.
“I would like to think, and what I say with my own words without representing anyone else, that with additional revenue in this case from Measure W, probably increases, and I use this word intentionally, the likelihood, the likelihood of things staying status quo, the lack of funds that we get if we’re not successful with the parcel tax or we have to re-run a parcel in ’09 at a lesser amount and we get a very bad January revise like we’re expecting, the likelihood of being back where we were last spring increases. And as you know David, everything is back on the table and being evaluated and discussed. And that is my fear, that being in a place early in our school year where our fiscal indicates that we have to make some cuts and that’s where I don’t want to be.”
Again, Measure W’s passage will not guarantee that Emerson stays open. It will not. What Measure W does is take all of the position that Measure W funds, all of the teaching positions and it guarantees them for the next three years. Those positions by law cannot be eliminated. That frees up other money to go to keep Emerson open.
If the district does not have that money from Measure W then they have a choice, they can either terminate the positions that W would have funded or they can try to save money by closing schools. My guess is that they are going to close at least one school if they do not get Measure W or if they have to pass a smaller parcel tax in the spring.
Again, if you want to insure that Emerson closes, vote against the parcel tax. Because if the parcel tax fails and they have to come with a smaller amount in the spring, Emerson is likely gone. If you want Emerson to have a possibility to remain open, you have to vote for Measure W.
With $2.4 million, you are not going to nickel and dime your way to a balanced budget. If it were $0.24 million you might have a chance to. But with it at $2.4 million you have to cut from that 82% of the budget, and that is classroom money.
Again, the illogic of the position, they won’t guarantee Emerson so I’ll vote against Measure W is breathtaking. The reverse is most likely true.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I totally agree with DPD on this one. W is not a panacea, but it is $ and it’s passage will logically take some pressure off any moves to close Emerson for fiscal reasons. However, there is no mention here of how the school trustees were talking up the possibility of closing Emerson in March, which motivated a portion of West Davis to demand due process (ie, public hearings).
If you have kids affected and live in West Davis there are several facts which make you less than confident in the people involved and the process: 1) The building of Korematsu (when there was no real need for it), 2) the siting of Harper, 3) the glibness with which elected officials speak of how easy it is for 7th graders from West Davis to bike to Holmes, and 4) The fact that the school board appeared to be ready to vote on the closure of Emerson in March without the legally required public hearings. All of this together seems very much like the school board has an anti-Emerson agenda with little regard for the affected kids and families. Call it a lack of trust.
That being said, W’s passage is obviously necessary if Emerson is to remain open, but make no mistake, West Davis does not trust the board (as a whole) to be objective on this particular issue.
I totally agree with DPD on this one. W is not a panacea, but it is $ and it’s passage will logically take some pressure off any moves to close Emerson for fiscal reasons. However, there is no mention here of how the school trustees were talking up the possibility of closing Emerson in March, which motivated a portion of West Davis to demand due process (ie, public hearings).
If you have kids affected and live in West Davis there are several facts which make you less than confident in the people involved and the process: 1) The building of Korematsu (when there was no real need for it), 2) the siting of Harper, 3) the glibness with which elected officials speak of how easy it is for 7th graders from West Davis to bike to Holmes, and 4) The fact that the school board appeared to be ready to vote on the closure of Emerson in March without the legally required public hearings. All of this together seems very much like the school board has an anti-Emerson agenda with little regard for the affected kids and families. Call it a lack of trust.
That being said, W’s passage is obviously necessary if Emerson is to remain open, but make no mistake, West Davis does not trust the board (as a whole) to be objective on this particular issue.
I totally agree with DPD on this one. W is not a panacea, but it is $ and it’s passage will logically take some pressure off any moves to close Emerson for fiscal reasons. However, there is no mention here of how the school trustees were talking up the possibility of closing Emerson in March, which motivated a portion of West Davis to demand due process (ie, public hearings).
If you have kids affected and live in West Davis there are several facts which make you less than confident in the people involved and the process: 1) The building of Korematsu (when there was no real need for it), 2) the siting of Harper, 3) the glibness with which elected officials speak of how easy it is for 7th graders from West Davis to bike to Holmes, and 4) The fact that the school board appeared to be ready to vote on the closure of Emerson in March without the legally required public hearings. All of this together seems very much like the school board has an anti-Emerson agenda with little regard for the affected kids and families. Call it a lack of trust.
That being said, W’s passage is obviously necessary if Emerson is to remain open, but make no mistake, West Davis does not trust the board (as a whole) to be objective on this particular issue.
I totally agree with DPD on this one. W is not a panacea, but it is $ and it’s passage will logically take some pressure off any moves to close Emerson for fiscal reasons. However, there is no mention here of how the school trustees were talking up the possibility of closing Emerson in March, which motivated a portion of West Davis to demand due process (ie, public hearings).
If you have kids affected and live in West Davis there are several facts which make you less than confident in the people involved and the process: 1) The building of Korematsu (when there was no real need for it), 2) the siting of Harper, 3) the glibness with which elected officials speak of how easy it is for 7th graders from West Davis to bike to Holmes, and 4) The fact that the school board appeared to be ready to vote on the closure of Emerson in March without the legally required public hearings. All of this together seems very much like the school board has an anti-Emerson agenda with little regard for the affected kids and families. Call it a lack of trust.
That being said, W’s passage is obviously necessary if Emerson is to remain open, but make no mistake, West Davis does not trust the board (as a whole) to be objective on this particular issue.
The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching. Now you are using the blatant scare tactic that if you vote against W they’ll have to close Emerson because of facilities issues?
Honestly DPD, how much does the school district pay you? Is it only ad money, or are you also their official PR person now?
The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching. Now you are using the blatant scare tactic that if you vote against W they’ll have to close Emerson because of facilities issues?
Honestly DPD, how much does the school district pay you? Is it only ad money, or are you also their official PR person now?
The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching. Now you are using the blatant scare tactic that if you vote against W they’ll have to close Emerson because of facilities issues?
Honestly DPD, how much does the school district pay you? Is it only ad money, or are you also their official PR person now?
The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching. Now you are using the blatant scare tactic that if you vote against W they’ll have to close Emerson because of facilities issues?
Honestly DPD, how much does the school district pay you? Is it only ad money, or are you also their official PR person now?
The next school board elections are scheduled for November, 2009, a year from now. Three seats go up for election.
If you have a problem with the school board and the seats that go up for election — Daleiden’s, Taylor’s, and Allen’s — then consider running for one of those seats. Or recruit someone you’re comfortable with.
If you have problems with the parcel tax oversight committee, then getting on the school board will allow you the ultimate oversight.
If you think the district should have different spending priorities, then the next school board election is where you can make an impact.
Be an armchair critic, or put some actions behind your criticisms.
The next school board elections are scheduled for November, 2009, a year from now. Three seats go up for election.
If you have a problem with the school board and the seats that go up for election — Daleiden’s, Taylor’s, and Allen’s — then consider running for one of those seats. Or recruit someone you’re comfortable with.
If you have problems with the parcel tax oversight committee, then getting on the school board will allow you the ultimate oversight.
If you think the district should have different spending priorities, then the next school board election is where you can make an impact.
Be an armchair critic, or put some actions behind your criticisms.
The next school board elections are scheduled for November, 2009, a year from now. Three seats go up for election.
If you have a problem with the school board and the seats that go up for election — Daleiden’s, Taylor’s, and Allen’s — then consider running for one of those seats. Or recruit someone you’re comfortable with.
If you have problems with the parcel tax oversight committee, then getting on the school board will allow you the ultimate oversight.
If you think the district should have different spending priorities, then the next school board election is where you can make an impact.
Be an armchair critic, or put some actions behind your criticisms.
The next school board elections are scheduled for November, 2009, a year from now. Three seats go up for election.
If you have a problem with the school board and the seats that go up for election — Daleiden’s, Taylor’s, and Allen’s — then consider running for one of those seats. Or recruit someone you’re comfortable with.
If you have problems with the parcel tax oversight committee, then getting on the school board will allow you the ultimate oversight.
If you think the district should have different spending priorities, then the next school board election is where you can make an impact.
Be an armchair critic, or put some actions behind your criticisms.
“The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching. Now you are using the blatant scare tactic that if you vote against W they’ll have to close Emerson because of facilities issues?”
Let me explain (again) how district money works.
There is a general fund which is where the money that goes into the classrooms and to pay for personnel goes.
And there is a facilities fund. The facilities fund only pays for physical structures–buildings and grounds.
So the problems with Emerson have to do with some of structural issues of the cite. That is a facilities budget problem.
I read your comment as confusing the facilities budget with the cost of operating a specific school.
There are site specific costs for schools–you have the site administration (Principals, Vice Principals), you have support staff (like secretaries), you have maintenance staff and custodians.
You also have utilities costs, food staff, all sorts of things.
The district figured out last spring that the costs of site specific expenses amounted to $600,000. That doesn’t include teachers who would obviously have to move from one site to another with the students.
And they can save a certain amount of money by closing a school site.
That is general fund money not facilities money. Facilities money is only the physical buildings, not personnel.
Now you ask how much the district pays me “Is it only ad money”–first of all the ad money, if it were there, would not come from the district but rather the campaign which cannot use any district money.
Second, I actually donated the ad to the Yes on Measure W Campaign, it will appear in their campaign disclosure statement as a donation from me.
Third, why can’t it be, as I have elaborated for the last six to nine months that I think we cannot afford not to pass the parcel tax and we cannot afford to lose 40 teachers from the programs at this school? I have laid out the rationale for it on a regular basis. You may agree or disagree with that, but I think my motives are pretty plain, I believe in the cause, much like I believe in the other causes I have pressed over the two years plus I have run this blog whether it is to keep Valley Oak open to give Sodexho Workers a fair university contract or whether it is to cut fiscal spending from the city budget. I have never gotten anything for the stances I take or the causes I take up.
“The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching. Now you are using the blatant scare tactic that if you vote against W they’ll have to close Emerson because of facilities issues?”
Let me explain (again) how district money works.
There is a general fund which is where the money that goes into the classrooms and to pay for personnel goes.
And there is a facilities fund. The facilities fund only pays for physical structures–buildings and grounds.
So the problems with Emerson have to do with some of structural issues of the cite. That is a facilities budget problem.
I read your comment as confusing the facilities budget with the cost of operating a specific school.
There are site specific costs for schools–you have the site administration (Principals, Vice Principals), you have support staff (like secretaries), you have maintenance staff and custodians.
You also have utilities costs, food staff, all sorts of things.
The district figured out last spring that the costs of site specific expenses amounted to $600,000. That doesn’t include teachers who would obviously have to move from one site to another with the students.
And they can save a certain amount of money by closing a school site.
That is general fund money not facilities money. Facilities money is only the physical buildings, not personnel.
Now you ask how much the district pays me “Is it only ad money”–first of all the ad money, if it were there, would not come from the district but rather the campaign which cannot use any district money.
Second, I actually donated the ad to the Yes on Measure W Campaign, it will appear in their campaign disclosure statement as a donation from me.
Third, why can’t it be, as I have elaborated for the last six to nine months that I think we cannot afford not to pass the parcel tax and we cannot afford to lose 40 teachers from the programs at this school? I have laid out the rationale for it on a regular basis. You may agree or disagree with that, but I think my motives are pretty plain, I believe in the cause, much like I believe in the other causes I have pressed over the two years plus I have run this blog whether it is to keep Valley Oak open to give Sodexho Workers a fair university contract or whether it is to cut fiscal spending from the city budget. I have never gotten anything for the stances I take or the causes I take up.
“The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching. Now you are using the blatant scare tactic that if you vote against W they’ll have to close Emerson because of facilities issues?”
Let me explain (again) how district money works.
There is a general fund which is where the money that goes into the classrooms and to pay for personnel goes.
And there is a facilities fund. The facilities fund only pays for physical structures–buildings and grounds.
So the problems with Emerson have to do with some of structural issues of the cite. That is a facilities budget problem.
I read your comment as confusing the facilities budget with the cost of operating a specific school.
There are site specific costs for schools–you have the site administration (Principals, Vice Principals), you have support staff (like secretaries), you have maintenance staff and custodians.
You also have utilities costs, food staff, all sorts of things.
The district figured out last spring that the costs of site specific expenses amounted to $600,000. That doesn’t include teachers who would obviously have to move from one site to another with the students.
And they can save a certain amount of money by closing a school site.
That is general fund money not facilities money. Facilities money is only the physical buildings, not personnel.
Now you ask how much the district pays me “Is it only ad money”–first of all the ad money, if it were there, would not come from the district but rather the campaign which cannot use any district money.
Second, I actually donated the ad to the Yes on Measure W Campaign, it will appear in their campaign disclosure statement as a donation from me.
Third, why can’t it be, as I have elaborated for the last six to nine months that I think we cannot afford not to pass the parcel tax and we cannot afford to lose 40 teachers from the programs at this school? I have laid out the rationale for it on a regular basis. You may agree or disagree with that, but I think my motives are pretty plain, I believe in the cause, much like I believe in the other causes I have pressed over the two years plus I have run this blog whether it is to keep Valley Oak open to give Sodexho Workers a fair university contract or whether it is to cut fiscal spending from the city budget. I have never gotten anything for the stances I take or the causes I take up.
“The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching. Now you are using the blatant scare tactic that if you vote against W they’ll have to close Emerson because of facilities issues?”
Let me explain (again) how district money works.
There is a general fund which is where the money that goes into the classrooms and to pay for personnel goes.
And there is a facilities fund. The facilities fund only pays for physical structures–buildings and grounds.
So the problems with Emerson have to do with some of structural issues of the cite. That is a facilities budget problem.
I read your comment as confusing the facilities budget with the cost of operating a specific school.
There are site specific costs for schools–you have the site administration (Principals, Vice Principals), you have support staff (like secretaries), you have maintenance staff and custodians.
You also have utilities costs, food staff, all sorts of things.
The district figured out last spring that the costs of site specific expenses amounted to $600,000. That doesn’t include teachers who would obviously have to move from one site to another with the students.
And they can save a certain amount of money by closing a school site.
That is general fund money not facilities money. Facilities money is only the physical buildings, not personnel.
Now you ask how much the district pays me “Is it only ad money”–first of all the ad money, if it were there, would not come from the district but rather the campaign which cannot use any district money.
Second, I actually donated the ad to the Yes on Measure W Campaign, it will appear in their campaign disclosure statement as a donation from me.
Third, why can’t it be, as I have elaborated for the last six to nine months that I think we cannot afford not to pass the parcel tax and we cannot afford to lose 40 teachers from the programs at this school? I have laid out the rationale for it on a regular basis. You may agree or disagree with that, but I think my motives are pretty plain, I believe in the cause, much like I believe in the other causes I have pressed over the two years plus I have run this blog whether it is to keep Valley Oak open to give Sodexho Workers a fair university contract or whether it is to cut fiscal spending from the city budget. I have never gotten anything for the stances I take or the causes I take up.
“The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching.”
Perhaps you can explain your point about why Measure W supporters are “drinking the Kool-Aid”? The value and support of public education is pretty strong in Davis and in most communities.
“The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching.”
Perhaps you can explain your point about why Measure W supporters are “drinking the Kool-Aid”? The value and support of public education is pretty strong in Davis and in most communities.
“The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching.”
Perhaps you can explain your point about why Measure W supporters are “drinking the Kool-Aid”? The value and support of public education is pretty strong in Davis and in most communities.
“The Yes on W Kool-Aid drinkers keep stressing that facilities money can only be used for facilities and parcel tax money can only be used for teaching.”
Perhaps you can explain your point about why Measure W supporters are “drinking the Kool-Aid”? The value and support of public education is pretty strong in Davis and in most communities.
Emerson will not close if W loses. Which School Board member is going to commit political suicide by closing Emerson? You do not seem to understand political realities. Trust me when I tell you they will figure out a way to keep West Davis voters from an outright revolt.
Emerson will not close if W loses. Which School Board member is going to commit political suicide by closing Emerson? You do not seem to understand political realities. Trust me when I tell you they will figure out a way to keep West Davis voters from an outright revolt.
Emerson will not close if W loses. Which School Board member is going to commit political suicide by closing Emerson? You do not seem to understand political realities. Trust me when I tell you they will figure out a way to keep West Davis voters from an outright revolt.
Emerson will not close if W loses. Which School Board member is going to commit political suicide by closing Emerson? You do not seem to understand political realities. Trust me when I tell you they will figure out a way to keep West Davis voters from an outright revolt.
If the parcel tax were reduced for possible passage at a second spring go-round, we will be amazed at the money that will be “found” to keep Emerson open as it must be obvious to everyone that closing Emerson is a political non-starter for this board majority much the same way as allowing the Valley Oak charter to proceed was always a political non-starter.
If the parcel tax were reduced for possible passage at a second spring go-round, we will be amazed at the money that will be “found” to keep Emerson open as it must be obvious to everyone that closing Emerson is a political non-starter for this board majority much the same way as allowing the Valley Oak charter to proceed was always a political non-starter.
If the parcel tax were reduced for possible passage at a second spring go-round, we will be amazed at the money that will be “found” to keep Emerson open as it must be obvious to everyone that closing Emerson is a political non-starter for this board majority much the same way as allowing the Valley Oak charter to proceed was always a political non-starter.
If the parcel tax were reduced for possible passage at a second spring go-round, we will be amazed at the money that will be “found” to keep Emerson open as it must be obvious to everyone that closing Emerson is a political non-starter for this board majority much the same way as allowing the Valley Oak charter to proceed was always a political non-starter.
“Emerson will not close if W loses. Which School Board member is going to commit political suicide by closing Emerson? You do not seem to understand political realities.”
It looked very real last March when they were looking for savings in the budget.
Do you think all school board members are looking for a future in politics? I think there are at least one or two board members who seem to show a posture for a political future, but not all.
If you don’t aspire to a future in politics, then who cares about political suicide?
“Emerson will not close if W loses. Which School Board member is going to commit political suicide by closing Emerson? You do not seem to understand political realities.”
It looked very real last March when they were looking for savings in the budget.
Do you think all school board members are looking for a future in politics? I think there are at least one or two board members who seem to show a posture for a political future, but not all.
If you don’t aspire to a future in politics, then who cares about political suicide?
“Emerson will not close if W loses. Which School Board member is going to commit political suicide by closing Emerson? You do not seem to understand political realities.”
It looked very real last March when they were looking for savings in the budget.
Do you think all school board members are looking for a future in politics? I think there are at least one or two board members who seem to show a posture for a political future, but not all.
If you don’t aspire to a future in politics, then who cares about political suicide?
“Emerson will not close if W loses. Which School Board member is going to commit political suicide by closing Emerson? You do not seem to understand political realities.”
It looked very real last March when they were looking for savings in the budget.
Do you think all school board members are looking for a future in politics? I think there are at least one or two board members who seem to show a posture for a political future, but not all.
If you don’t aspire to a future in politics, then who cares about political suicide?
Following is a letter to the editor that I sent to the Enterprise over the weekend.
Note especially the last paragraph. I am a firm supporter of neighborhood schools for many reasons that I have publicly presented during School Board meetings for the Valley Oak and the Emerson discussions. Please show your support by Voting Yes on W.
Sheila Allen
“We moved to Davis because of the great schools. This is true for our family. I have received many emails from concerned citizens that begin with that very sentence. But, because of an on-going decline in state funding for public education the ability to continue our great programs is at stake.
This year the district cut $1.1 million dollars from the budget and still faced the specter of cutting an additional $2 million in program. With a budget that is over 80% direct student-related personnel, these dollars mean teacher jobs. Last spring hundreds of students, teachers, parents and community members lined up to ask that their program or position would not be cut. Luckily, the Davis Schools Foundation was able to rally the community to temporarily fill the gap for this school year only. Measure W will mean the teachers and our programs will continue for the next 3 years. Measure W means the Davis public schools will continue to be a great place to learn for all of our students.
On November 4 you have the opportunity to provide a solution. Coming to protest in March will not be a solution. The solution to save the teachers and program is now–and it is Measure W! Please vote yes on W.
Sheila Allen”
Following is a letter to the editor that I sent to the Enterprise over the weekend.
Note especially the last paragraph. I am a firm supporter of neighborhood schools for many reasons that I have publicly presented during School Board meetings for the Valley Oak and the Emerson discussions. Please show your support by Voting Yes on W.
Sheila Allen
“We moved to Davis because of the great schools. This is true for our family. I have received many emails from concerned citizens that begin with that very sentence. But, because of an on-going decline in state funding for public education the ability to continue our great programs is at stake.
This year the district cut $1.1 million dollars from the budget and still faced the specter of cutting an additional $2 million in program. With a budget that is over 80% direct student-related personnel, these dollars mean teacher jobs. Last spring hundreds of students, teachers, parents and community members lined up to ask that their program or position would not be cut. Luckily, the Davis Schools Foundation was able to rally the community to temporarily fill the gap for this school year only. Measure W will mean the teachers and our programs will continue for the next 3 years. Measure W means the Davis public schools will continue to be a great place to learn for all of our students.
On November 4 you have the opportunity to provide a solution. Coming to protest in March will not be a solution. The solution to save the teachers and program is now–and it is Measure W! Please vote yes on W.
Sheila Allen”
Following is a letter to the editor that I sent to the Enterprise over the weekend.
Note especially the last paragraph. I am a firm supporter of neighborhood schools for many reasons that I have publicly presented during School Board meetings for the Valley Oak and the Emerson discussions. Please show your support by Voting Yes on W.
Sheila Allen
“We moved to Davis because of the great schools. This is true for our family. I have received many emails from concerned citizens that begin with that very sentence. But, because of an on-going decline in state funding for public education the ability to continue our great programs is at stake.
This year the district cut $1.1 million dollars from the budget and still faced the specter of cutting an additional $2 million in program. With a budget that is over 80% direct student-related personnel, these dollars mean teacher jobs. Last spring hundreds of students, teachers, parents and community members lined up to ask that their program or position would not be cut. Luckily, the Davis Schools Foundation was able to rally the community to temporarily fill the gap for this school year only. Measure W will mean the teachers and our programs will continue for the next 3 years. Measure W means the Davis public schools will continue to be a great place to learn for all of our students.
On November 4 you have the opportunity to provide a solution. Coming to protest in March will not be a solution. The solution to save the teachers and program is now–and it is Measure W! Please vote yes on W.
Sheila Allen”
Following is a letter to the editor that I sent to the Enterprise over the weekend.
Note especially the last paragraph. I am a firm supporter of neighborhood schools for many reasons that I have publicly presented during School Board meetings for the Valley Oak and the Emerson discussions. Please show your support by Voting Yes on W.
Sheila Allen
“We moved to Davis because of the great schools. This is true for our family. I have received many emails from concerned citizens that begin with that very sentence. But, because of an on-going decline in state funding for public education the ability to continue our great programs is at stake.
This year the district cut $1.1 million dollars from the budget and still faced the specter of cutting an additional $2 million in program. With a budget that is over 80% direct student-related personnel, these dollars mean teacher jobs. Last spring hundreds of students, teachers, parents and community members lined up to ask that their program or position would not be cut. Luckily, the Davis Schools Foundation was able to rally the community to temporarily fill the gap for this school year only. Measure W will mean the teachers and our programs will continue for the next 3 years. Measure W means the Davis public schools will continue to be a great place to learn for all of our students.
On November 4 you have the opportunity to provide a solution. Coming to protest in March will not be a solution. The solution to save the teachers and program is now–and it is Measure W! Please vote yes on W.
Sheila Allen”
W needs to pass.
Emerson is a separate issue. It needs to stay open. If it comes up again as to closure, we fight that battle at that time.
Vote YES for W.
W needs to pass.
Emerson is a separate issue. It needs to stay open. If it comes up again as to closure, we fight that battle at that time.
Vote YES for W.
W needs to pass.
Emerson is a separate issue. It needs to stay open. If it comes up again as to closure, we fight that battle at that time.
Vote YES for W.
W needs to pass.
Emerson is a separate issue. It needs to stay open. If it comes up again as to closure, we fight that battle at that time.
Vote YES for W.
As part of the facilities master plan that the district has been carrying out, teachers have been asked to discuss how their program/classes would change in their facilities if the secondary grades were to re-organize.
The way I understand it is that the district is just gathering information that at least some members of the board wanted to know. Does the district have the facilities to pull off the kind of reorganization that was discussed in March?
I have chatted with some teachers, and one line of answers coming back is “not really.”
DHS was built to accomodate growth for grades 10-12. The district junior highs were designed mainly to accomodate grades 7-9. If the district chose to deviate from that configuration, the current facilities would be less suited to that alternate scenario.
I think some of the gossip over Emerson has been coming from efforts by the district to evaluate what its facilities and to provide answers to questions that the board asked at one time.
It does not mean the district is intending to reconfigure the secondary schools. But it is a fair question that the district should want to know the answer to.
I’m not an insider, but that is what I glean from discussions with a few secondary teachers in the distirict.
As part of the facilities master plan that the district has been carrying out, teachers have been asked to discuss how their program/classes would change in their facilities if the secondary grades were to re-organize.
The way I understand it is that the district is just gathering information that at least some members of the board wanted to know. Does the district have the facilities to pull off the kind of reorganization that was discussed in March?
I have chatted with some teachers, and one line of answers coming back is “not really.”
DHS was built to accomodate growth for grades 10-12. The district junior highs were designed mainly to accomodate grades 7-9. If the district chose to deviate from that configuration, the current facilities would be less suited to that alternate scenario.
I think some of the gossip over Emerson has been coming from efforts by the district to evaluate what its facilities and to provide answers to questions that the board asked at one time.
It does not mean the district is intending to reconfigure the secondary schools. But it is a fair question that the district should want to know the answer to.
I’m not an insider, but that is what I glean from discussions with a few secondary teachers in the distirict.
As part of the facilities master plan that the district has been carrying out, teachers have been asked to discuss how their program/classes would change in their facilities if the secondary grades were to re-organize.
The way I understand it is that the district is just gathering information that at least some members of the board wanted to know. Does the district have the facilities to pull off the kind of reorganization that was discussed in March?
I have chatted with some teachers, and one line of answers coming back is “not really.”
DHS was built to accomodate growth for grades 10-12. The district junior highs were designed mainly to accomodate grades 7-9. If the district chose to deviate from that configuration, the current facilities would be less suited to that alternate scenario.
I think some of the gossip over Emerson has been coming from efforts by the district to evaluate what its facilities and to provide answers to questions that the board asked at one time.
It does not mean the district is intending to reconfigure the secondary schools. But it is a fair question that the district should want to know the answer to.
I’m not an insider, but that is what I glean from discussions with a few secondary teachers in the distirict.
As part of the facilities master plan that the district has been carrying out, teachers have been asked to discuss how their program/classes would change in their facilities if the secondary grades were to re-organize.
The way I understand it is that the district is just gathering information that at least some members of the board wanted to know. Does the district have the facilities to pull off the kind of reorganization that was discussed in March?
I have chatted with some teachers, and one line of answers coming back is “not really.”
DHS was built to accomodate growth for grades 10-12. The district junior highs were designed mainly to accomodate grades 7-9. If the district chose to deviate from that configuration, the current facilities would be less suited to that alternate scenario.
I think some of the gossip over Emerson has been coming from efforts by the district to evaluate what its facilities and to provide answers to questions that the board asked at one time.
It does not mean the district is intending to reconfigure the secondary schools. But it is a fair question that the district should want to know the answer to.
I’m not an insider, but that is what I glean from discussions with a few secondary teachers in the distirict.
First of all according to the sample ballot proposed tax statement the Measure W Oversight Committee like which is the case with the Measure Q Oversight Committee is appointed by the Membership of the Davis School Board without an apparent fair selection process for its members other than likely just being the cronies of the School Board Membership that selected them and are unlikely to objectively act in regard to their recommendations out of political favortism being beholden to such political cronyism as the total school board membership supports Measures Q and W.
Also, the DJUSD website at http://www.djusd.org has no linked posted webpage of the agenda, minutes and other information concerning the conduct of the Oversight Committee which should be viewed as a lack of accountability in regard to these issues by the Davis School Board and the Administration.
And the Oversight Committee dosen’t have the power to take actions but only just recommendations regarding Measures Q and W as the School Board Does.
Assumptions that Emerson Junior High School will close if Measure W dosen’t pass is an example of the excuses and scare tactics made by the School Administration whom are appointees by the School Board to get the voters to approve more money by passing Measure W.
If any of you want to know the reasons why you should vote no on Measure W just log on to the following website at the following website address (see below):
http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
First of all according to the sample ballot proposed tax statement the Measure W Oversight Committee like which is the case with the Measure Q Oversight Committee is appointed by the Membership of the Davis School Board without an apparent fair selection process for its members other than likely just being the cronies of the School Board Membership that selected them and are unlikely to objectively act in regard to their recommendations out of political favortism being beholden to such political cronyism as the total school board membership supports Measures Q and W.
Also, the DJUSD website at http://www.djusd.org has no linked posted webpage of the agenda, minutes and other information concerning the conduct of the Oversight Committee which should be viewed as a lack of accountability in regard to these issues by the Davis School Board and the Administration.
And the Oversight Committee dosen’t have the power to take actions but only just recommendations regarding Measures Q and W as the School Board Does.
Assumptions that Emerson Junior High School will close if Measure W dosen’t pass is an example of the excuses and scare tactics made by the School Administration whom are appointees by the School Board to get the voters to approve more money by passing Measure W.
If any of you want to know the reasons why you should vote no on Measure W just log on to the following website at the following website address (see below):
http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
First of all according to the sample ballot proposed tax statement the Measure W Oversight Committee like which is the case with the Measure Q Oversight Committee is appointed by the Membership of the Davis School Board without an apparent fair selection process for its members other than likely just being the cronies of the School Board Membership that selected them and are unlikely to objectively act in regard to their recommendations out of political favortism being beholden to such political cronyism as the total school board membership supports Measures Q and W.
Also, the DJUSD website at http://www.djusd.org has no linked posted webpage of the agenda, minutes and other information concerning the conduct of the Oversight Committee which should be viewed as a lack of accountability in regard to these issues by the Davis School Board and the Administration.
And the Oversight Committee dosen’t have the power to take actions but only just recommendations regarding Measures Q and W as the School Board Does.
Assumptions that Emerson Junior High School will close if Measure W dosen’t pass is an example of the excuses and scare tactics made by the School Administration whom are appointees by the School Board to get the voters to approve more money by passing Measure W.
If any of you want to know the reasons why you should vote no on Measure W just log on to the following website at the following website address (see below):
http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
First of all according to the sample ballot proposed tax statement the Measure W Oversight Committee like which is the case with the Measure Q Oversight Committee is appointed by the Membership of the Davis School Board without an apparent fair selection process for its members other than likely just being the cronies of the School Board Membership that selected them and are unlikely to objectively act in regard to their recommendations out of political favortism being beholden to such political cronyism as the total school board membership supports Measures Q and W.
Also, the DJUSD website at http://www.djusd.org has no linked posted webpage of the agenda, minutes and other information concerning the conduct of the Oversight Committee which should be viewed as a lack of accountability in regard to these issues by the Davis School Board and the Administration.
And the Oversight Committee dosen’t have the power to take actions but only just recommendations regarding Measures Q and W as the School Board Does.
Assumptions that Emerson Junior High School will close if Measure W dosen’t pass is an example of the excuses and scare tactics made by the School Administration whom are appointees by the School Board to get the voters to approve more money by passing Measure W.
If any of you want to know the reasons why you should vote no on Measure W just log on to the following website at the following website address (see below):
http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
“Assumptions that Emerson Junior High School will close if Measure W dosen’t pass is an example of the excuses and scare tactics made by the School Administration whom are appointees by the School Board to get the voters to approve more money by passing Measure W.”
And the school board is elected by the voters, including you and your buddies. Tom, did you vote in the last school board election?
I remember reading a comment on this blog a while back that she didn’t think the district would really close Valley Oak. That somehow it was just a ploy.
But she was hugely pissed that it closed.
Your argument could make sense in another context, but in the context of what is going on with the state budget, I don’t believe you. The state isn’t looking to propose any budget that is better than last year. Last year left the district with a deficit. It will leave the district with a deficit this year.
“Assumptions that Emerson Junior High School will close if Measure W dosen’t pass is an example of the excuses and scare tactics made by the School Administration whom are appointees by the School Board to get the voters to approve more money by passing Measure W.”
And the school board is elected by the voters, including you and your buddies. Tom, did you vote in the last school board election?
I remember reading a comment on this blog a while back that she didn’t think the district would really close Valley Oak. That somehow it was just a ploy.
But she was hugely pissed that it closed.
Your argument could make sense in another context, but in the context of what is going on with the state budget, I don’t believe you. The state isn’t looking to propose any budget that is better than last year. Last year left the district with a deficit. It will leave the district with a deficit this year.
“Assumptions that Emerson Junior High School will close if Measure W dosen’t pass is an example of the excuses and scare tactics made by the School Administration whom are appointees by the School Board to get the voters to approve more money by passing Measure W.”
And the school board is elected by the voters, including you and your buddies. Tom, did you vote in the last school board election?
I remember reading a comment on this blog a while back that she didn’t think the district would really close Valley Oak. That somehow it was just a ploy.
But she was hugely pissed that it closed.
Your argument could make sense in another context, but in the context of what is going on with the state budget, I don’t believe you. The state isn’t looking to propose any budget that is better than last year. Last year left the district with a deficit. It will leave the district with a deficit this year.
“Assumptions that Emerson Junior High School will close if Measure W dosen’t pass is an example of the excuses and scare tactics made by the School Administration whom are appointees by the School Board to get the voters to approve more money by passing Measure W.”
And the school board is elected by the voters, including you and your buddies. Tom, did you vote in the last school board election?
I remember reading a comment on this blog a while back that she didn’t think the district would really close Valley Oak. That somehow it was just a ploy.
But she was hugely pissed that it closed.
Your argument could make sense in another context, but in the context of what is going on with the state budget, I don’t believe you. The state isn’t looking to propose any budget that is better than last year. Last year left the district with a deficit. It will leave the district with a deficit this year.
If you want to learn more about Measure W, read many more reasons to support it, or volunteer to support the Yes campaign, you can go to
http://www.yesw.org
or contact campaign coordinator, Kingsley Melton at (530)554-2548
If you want to learn more about Measure W, read many more reasons to support it, or volunteer to support the Yes campaign, you can go to
http://www.yesw.org
or contact campaign coordinator, Kingsley Melton at (530)554-2548
If you want to learn more about Measure W, read many more reasons to support it, or volunteer to support the Yes campaign, you can go to
http://www.yesw.org
or contact campaign coordinator, Kingsley Melton at (530)554-2548
If you want to learn more about Measure W, read many more reasons to support it, or volunteer to support the Yes campaign, you can go to
http://www.yesw.org
or contact campaign coordinator, Kingsley Melton at (530)554-2548
First of all according to the sample ballot proposed tax statement the Measure W Oversight Committee like which is the case with the Measure Q Oversight Committee is appointed by the Membership of the Davis School Board without an apparent fair selection process for its members other than likely just being the cronies of the School Board Membership that selected them and are unlikely to objectively act in regard to their recommendations out of political favortism being beholden to such political cronyism as the total school board membership supports Measures Q and W.
I see no reason to create more bureaucracy. Instead hold the school board members accountable in the regular elections. The next schedule school board election is in 2009.
Otherwise the school board selected and approved in the oversight committee in open meeting with the opportunity for public comment. If you didn’t approve their choices you had the chance to voice your concerns.
The recently approved oversight committee consists of at least a couple of local small business owners who have a record of being responsible citizens and of running successful business.
You can also express your interest in serving on such a committee by communicating with school board members when there is an opening. Did you do that?
Also, the DJUSD website at http://www.djusd.org has no linked posted webpage of the agenda, minutes and other information concerning the conduct of the Oversight Committee which should be viewed as a lack of accountability in regard to these issues by the Davis School Board and the Administration.
I already queried the district and school board about that very issue a couple of weeks ago. Their webpage will be up soon. They haven’t yet met as a committee and were only just approved at the last school board meeting.
At the last school board meeting, I believe their first meeting was tentatively set for some time shortly after the first of the year.
First of all according to the sample ballot proposed tax statement the Measure W Oversight Committee like which is the case with the Measure Q Oversight Committee is appointed by the Membership of the Davis School Board without an apparent fair selection process for its members other than likely just being the cronies of the School Board Membership that selected them and are unlikely to objectively act in regard to their recommendations out of political favortism being beholden to such political cronyism as the total school board membership supports Measures Q and W.
I see no reason to create more bureaucracy. Instead hold the school board members accountable in the regular elections. The next schedule school board election is in 2009.
Otherwise the school board selected and approved in the oversight committee in open meeting with the opportunity for public comment. If you didn’t approve their choices you had the chance to voice your concerns.
The recently approved oversight committee consists of at least a couple of local small business owners who have a record of being responsible citizens and of running successful business.
You can also express your interest in serving on such a committee by communicating with school board members when there is an opening. Did you do that?
Also, the DJUSD website at http://www.djusd.org has no linked posted webpage of the agenda, minutes and other information concerning the conduct of the Oversight Committee which should be viewed as a lack of accountability in regard to these issues by the Davis School Board and the Administration.
I already queried the district and school board about that very issue a couple of weeks ago. Their webpage will be up soon. They haven’t yet met as a committee and were only just approved at the last school board meeting.
At the last school board meeting, I believe their first meeting was tentatively set for some time shortly after the first of the year.
First of all according to the sample ballot proposed tax statement the Measure W Oversight Committee like which is the case with the Measure Q Oversight Committee is appointed by the Membership of the Davis School Board without an apparent fair selection process for its members other than likely just being the cronies of the School Board Membership that selected them and are unlikely to objectively act in regard to their recommendations out of political favortism being beholden to such political cronyism as the total school board membership supports Measures Q and W.
I see no reason to create more bureaucracy. Instead hold the school board members accountable in the regular elections. The next schedule school board election is in 2009.
Otherwise the school board selected and approved in the oversight committee in open meeting with the opportunity for public comment. If you didn’t approve their choices you had the chance to voice your concerns.
The recently approved oversight committee consists of at least a couple of local small business owners who have a record of being responsible citizens and of running successful business.
You can also express your interest in serving on such a committee by communicating with school board members when there is an opening. Did you do that?
Also, the DJUSD website at http://www.djusd.org has no linked posted webpage of the agenda, minutes and other information concerning the conduct of the Oversight Committee which should be viewed as a lack of accountability in regard to these issues by the Davis School Board and the Administration.
I already queried the district and school board about that very issue a couple of weeks ago. Their webpage will be up soon. They haven’t yet met as a committee and were only just approved at the last school board meeting.
At the last school board meeting, I believe their first meeting was tentatively set for some time shortly after the first of the year.
First of all according to the sample ballot proposed tax statement the Measure W Oversight Committee like which is the case with the Measure Q Oversight Committee is appointed by the Membership of the Davis School Board without an apparent fair selection process for its members other than likely just being the cronies of the School Board Membership that selected them and are unlikely to objectively act in regard to their recommendations out of political favortism being beholden to such political cronyism as the total school board membership supports Measures Q and W.
I see no reason to create more bureaucracy. Instead hold the school board members accountable in the regular elections. The next schedule school board election is in 2009.
Otherwise the school board selected and approved in the oversight committee in open meeting with the opportunity for public comment. If you didn’t approve their choices you had the chance to voice your concerns.
The recently approved oversight committee consists of at least a couple of local small business owners who have a record of being responsible citizens and of running successful business.
You can also express your interest in serving on such a committee by communicating with school board members when there is an opening. Did you do that?
Also, the DJUSD website at http://www.djusd.org has no linked posted webpage of the agenda, minutes and other information concerning the conduct of the Oversight Committee which should be viewed as a lack of accountability in regard to these issues by the Davis School Board and the Administration.
I already queried the district and school board about that very issue a couple of weeks ago. Their webpage will be up soon. They haven’t yet met as a committee and were only just approved at the last school board meeting.
At the last school board meeting, I believe their first meeting was tentatively set for some time shortly after the first of the year.
“If any of you want to know the reasons why you should vote no on Measure W just log on to the following website “
I went there – sorry but I have to say it – what a lame website! Remember this parcel tax will cost you $10 a month if you live in a house – that is about $6 to $7 per month after taxes. If you are too cheap to invest in the youth of your community then please just come out and proclaim it!
“If any of you want to know the reasons why you should vote no on Measure W just log on to the following website “
I went there – sorry but I have to say it – what a lame website! Remember this parcel tax will cost you $10 a month if you live in a house – that is about $6 to $7 per month after taxes. If you are too cheap to invest in the youth of your community then please just come out and proclaim it!
“If any of you want to know the reasons why you should vote no on Measure W just log on to the following website “
I went there – sorry but I have to say it – what a lame website! Remember this parcel tax will cost you $10 a month if you live in a house – that is about $6 to $7 per month after taxes. If you are too cheap to invest in the youth of your community then please just come out and proclaim it!
“If any of you want to know the reasons why you should vote no on Measure W just log on to the following website “
I went there – sorry but I have to say it – what a lame website! Remember this parcel tax will cost you $10 a month if you live in a house – that is about $6 to $7 per month after taxes. If you are too cheap to invest in the youth of your community then please just come out and proclaim it!
The above poster is wrong. You cannot legally deduct parcel taxes (although many of you do anyway). The cost will be 10 dollars a month. Not much, to be sure, but not 6-7 dollars as the poster states.
The above poster is wrong. You cannot legally deduct parcel taxes (although many of you do anyway). The cost will be 10 dollars a month. Not much, to be sure, but not 6-7 dollars as the poster states.
The above poster is wrong. You cannot legally deduct parcel taxes (although many of you do anyway). The cost will be 10 dollars a month. Not much, to be sure, but not 6-7 dollars as the poster states.
The above poster is wrong. You cannot legally deduct parcel taxes (although many of you do anyway). The cost will be 10 dollars a month. Not much, to be sure, but not 6-7 dollars as the poster states.
My income tax always asks for state and local taxes, including property tax. I don’t see why it isn’t legal.
My income tax always asks for state and local taxes, including property tax. I don’t see why it isn’t legal.
My income tax always asks for state and local taxes, including property tax. I don’t see why it isn’t legal.
My income tax always asks for state and local taxes, including property tax. I don’t see why it isn’t legal.
Answering the critics of the No on Measure W Position,
First of all if the DJUSD managed its budget properly and did not unessecarily spoend taxpayer money in cost overruns for certain projects in the case of a state budget shortfall the negative impact would be less today provide if that event is not just an excuse to proposed to tax the property owners more with Measure W.
Yes, I do vote in all school board elections.
Just because the School Board holds a public meeting open to public comment regarding a selection of Oversight Committee Members don’t rule out completely to prospect of political cronyism being involved as a determining factor with such selections. A random drawing process of applicants would be a better way to select members that have a greater possibility of acting impartial regarding this oversight process.
When you add all the additional voter approved assements that add up to seven (7) currently on the City of Davis Property Tax Bill that are currently in effect the rate a non-exempted parcel owner would pay is $39.50 a month which is about four (4) times greater that just the assesment by Measure W alone if it passes.
For more information about why you should vote “No on Measure W” please view the following website at the following address:
http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
Answering the critics of the No on Measure W Position,
First of all if the DJUSD managed its budget properly and did not unessecarily spoend taxpayer money in cost overruns for certain projects in the case of a state budget shortfall the negative impact would be less today provide if that event is not just an excuse to proposed to tax the property owners more with Measure W.
Yes, I do vote in all school board elections.
Just because the School Board holds a public meeting open to public comment regarding a selection of Oversight Committee Members don’t rule out completely to prospect of political cronyism being involved as a determining factor with such selections. A random drawing process of applicants would be a better way to select members that have a greater possibility of acting impartial regarding this oversight process.
When you add all the additional voter approved assements that add up to seven (7) currently on the City of Davis Property Tax Bill that are currently in effect the rate a non-exempted parcel owner would pay is $39.50 a month which is about four (4) times greater that just the assesment by Measure W alone if it passes.
For more information about why you should vote “No on Measure W” please view the following website at the following address:
http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
Answering the critics of the No on Measure W Position,
First of all if the DJUSD managed its budget properly and did not unessecarily spoend taxpayer money in cost overruns for certain projects in the case of a state budget shortfall the negative impact would be less today provide if that event is not just an excuse to proposed to tax the property owners more with Measure W.
Yes, I do vote in all school board elections.
Just because the School Board holds a public meeting open to public comment regarding a selection of Oversight Committee Members don’t rule out completely to prospect of political cronyism being involved as a determining factor with such selections. A random drawing process of applicants would be a better way to select members that have a greater possibility of acting impartial regarding this oversight process.
When you add all the additional voter approved assements that add up to seven (7) currently on the City of Davis Property Tax Bill that are currently in effect the rate a non-exempted parcel owner would pay is $39.50 a month which is about four (4) times greater that just the assesment by Measure W alone if it passes.
For more information about why you should vote “No on Measure W” please view the following website at the following address:
http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
Answering the critics of the No on Measure W Position,
First of all if the DJUSD managed its budget properly and did not unessecarily spoend taxpayer money in cost overruns for certain projects in the case of a state budget shortfall the negative impact would be less today provide if that event is not just an excuse to proposed to tax the property owners more with Measure W.
Yes, I do vote in all school board elections.
Just because the School Board holds a public meeting open to public comment regarding a selection of Oversight Committee Members don’t rule out completely to prospect of political cronyism being involved as a determining factor with such selections. A random drawing process of applicants would be a better way to select members that have a greater possibility of acting impartial regarding this oversight process.
When you add all the additional voter approved assements that add up to seven (7) currently on the City of Davis Property Tax Bill that are currently in effect the rate a non-exempted parcel owner would pay is $39.50 a month which is about four (4) times greater that just the assesment by Measure W alone if it passes.
For more information about why you should vote “No on Measure W” please view the following website at the following address:
http://www.yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
“Local benefit taxes are deductible only if they are for maintenance, repair, or interest charges related to those benefits.”
Source: IRS Publication 17 page 146 under Real Estate-Related Items You Cannot Deduct
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf
“Deductible real estate taxes are any state, local or foreign taxes on real property levied for the general public welfare. You can deduct these taxes ONLY if they are based on the ASSESSED VALUE of the real property and charged uniformly against all property under the jurisdiction of the taxing authority.”
Source: IRS Publication 17 page 145 under Real Estate Taxes
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf
Measure W is a local benefit tax that is not specified for maintenance, repair or interest charges related to those benefits. Furthermore, Measure W is NOT based on the assessed value of your property but is instead charged at the same rate throughout the community based on type of property. It cannot be deducted legally.
Please read the publication and you will understand.
“Local benefit taxes are deductible only if they are for maintenance, repair, or interest charges related to those benefits.”
Source: IRS Publication 17 page 146 under Real Estate-Related Items You Cannot Deduct
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf
“Deductible real estate taxes are any state, local or foreign taxes on real property levied for the general public welfare. You can deduct these taxes ONLY if they are based on the ASSESSED VALUE of the real property and charged uniformly against all property under the jurisdiction of the taxing authority.”
Source: IRS Publication 17 page 145 under Real Estate Taxes
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf
Measure W is a local benefit tax that is not specified for maintenance, repair or interest charges related to those benefits. Furthermore, Measure W is NOT based on the assessed value of your property but is instead charged at the same rate throughout the community based on type of property. It cannot be deducted legally.
Please read the publication and you will understand.
“Local benefit taxes are deductible only if they are for maintenance, repair, or interest charges related to those benefits.”
Source: IRS Publication 17 page 146 under Real Estate-Related Items You Cannot Deduct
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf
“Deductible real estate taxes are any state, local or foreign taxes on real property levied for the general public welfare. You can deduct these taxes ONLY if they are based on the ASSESSED VALUE of the real property and charged uniformly against all property under the jurisdiction of the taxing authority.”
Source: IRS Publication 17 page 145 under Real Estate Taxes
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf
Measure W is a local benefit tax that is not specified for maintenance, repair or interest charges related to those benefits. Furthermore, Measure W is NOT based on the assessed value of your property but is instead charged at the same rate throughout the community based on type of property. It cannot be deducted legally.
Please read the publication and you will understand.
“Local benefit taxes are deductible only if they are for maintenance, repair, or interest charges related to those benefits.”
Source: IRS Publication 17 page 146 under Real Estate-Related Items You Cannot Deduct
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf
“Deductible real estate taxes are any state, local or foreign taxes on real property levied for the general public welfare. You can deduct these taxes ONLY if they are based on the ASSESSED VALUE of the real property and charged uniformly against all property under the jurisdiction of the taxing authority.”
Source: IRS Publication 17 page 145 under Real Estate Taxes
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf
Measure W is a local benefit tax that is not specified for maintenance, repair or interest charges related to those benefits. Furthermore, Measure W is NOT based on the assessed value of your property but is instead charged at the same rate throughout the community based on type of property. It cannot be deducted legally.
Please read the publication and you will understand.
“Measure W is a local benefit tax that is not specified for maintenance, repair or interest charges related to those benefits.”
I have read the publications and they are clear as mud.
The fact is all of the parcel tax is for “maintenance” of the schools – not for capital imrovements. The assessed valuation provision is tecnically troubling, however from a practical standpoint I have never heard of anyone called for deducting school district parcel taxes.
The intent of the law (described above) is to cover public works projects that specifically improve the value of the taxpayer’s property.
“Measure W is a local benefit tax that is not specified for maintenance, repair or interest charges related to those benefits.”
I have read the publications and they are clear as mud.
The fact is all of the parcel tax is for “maintenance” of the schools – not for capital imrovements. The assessed valuation provision is tecnically troubling, however from a practical standpoint I have never heard of anyone called for deducting school district parcel taxes.
The intent of the law (described above) is to cover public works projects that specifically improve the value of the taxpayer’s property.
“Measure W is a local benefit tax that is not specified for maintenance, repair or interest charges related to those benefits.”
I have read the publications and they are clear as mud.
The fact is all of the parcel tax is for “maintenance” of the schools – not for capital imrovements. The assessed valuation provision is tecnically troubling, however from a practical standpoint I have never heard of anyone called for deducting school district parcel taxes.
The intent of the law (described above) is to cover public works projects that specifically improve the value of the taxpayer’s property.
“Measure W is a local benefit tax that is not specified for maintenance, repair or interest charges related to those benefits.”
I have read the publications and they are clear as mud.
The fact is all of the parcel tax is for “maintenance” of the schools – not for capital imrovements. The assessed valuation provision is tecnically troubling, however from a practical standpoint I have never heard of anyone called for deducting school district parcel taxes.
The intent of the law (described above) is to cover public works projects that specifically improve the value of the taxpayer’s property.
“The fact is all of the parcel tax is for “maintenance” of the schools “
If you want to call teacher salaries “maintenance” then by all means deduct the parcel tax. I tried to deduct the previous parcel taxes and had them disallowed by the IRS. Intent means nothing to the auditors. Good luck!
“The fact is all of the parcel tax is for “maintenance” of the schools “
If you want to call teacher salaries “maintenance” then by all means deduct the parcel tax. I tried to deduct the previous parcel taxes and had them disallowed by the IRS. Intent means nothing to the auditors. Good luck!
“The fact is all of the parcel tax is for “maintenance” of the schools “
If you want to call teacher salaries “maintenance” then by all means deduct the parcel tax. I tried to deduct the previous parcel taxes and had them disallowed by the IRS. Intent means nothing to the auditors. Good luck!
“The fact is all of the parcel tax is for “maintenance” of the schools “
If you want to call teacher salaries “maintenance” then by all means deduct the parcel tax. I tried to deduct the previous parcel taxes and had them disallowed by the IRS. Intent means nothing to the auditors. Good luck!
Why was the School District/Board unwilling to pass a parcel tax to save Emerson, which would have amounted to about $20 or so? Citizens probably would have rallied around SPECIFICS such as that. Weasel wording in regard to Emerson by Hammond doesn’t cut it in my book.
I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!
And now the Crunch Lunch program is part of the core curricula we must save at all costs (pardon the pun)! And is this local author going to continue getting paid for cooking lessons every year?
Why is it if you disagree with Yes on W proponents, you didn’t vote in Bd of Ed elections, didn’t go to Bd meetings and speak out, don’t care about the kids, etc ad nauseum. When you give blank checks with no strings attached, there is no MEANINGFUL ACCOUNTABILITY.
Why was the School District/Board unwilling to pass a parcel tax to save Emerson, which would have amounted to about $20 or so? Citizens probably would have rallied around SPECIFICS such as that. Weasel wording in regard to Emerson by Hammond doesn’t cut it in my book.
I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!
And now the Crunch Lunch program is part of the core curricula we must save at all costs (pardon the pun)! And is this local author going to continue getting paid for cooking lessons every year?
Why is it if you disagree with Yes on W proponents, you didn’t vote in Bd of Ed elections, didn’t go to Bd meetings and speak out, don’t care about the kids, etc ad nauseum. When you give blank checks with no strings attached, there is no MEANINGFUL ACCOUNTABILITY.
Why was the School District/Board unwilling to pass a parcel tax to save Emerson, which would have amounted to about $20 or so? Citizens probably would have rallied around SPECIFICS such as that. Weasel wording in regard to Emerson by Hammond doesn’t cut it in my book.
I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!
And now the Crunch Lunch program is part of the core curricula we must save at all costs (pardon the pun)! And is this local author going to continue getting paid for cooking lessons every year?
Why is it if you disagree with Yes on W proponents, you didn’t vote in Bd of Ed elections, didn’t go to Bd meetings and speak out, don’t care about the kids, etc ad nauseum. When you give blank checks with no strings attached, there is no MEANINGFUL ACCOUNTABILITY.
Why was the School District/Board unwilling to pass a parcel tax to save Emerson, which would have amounted to about $20 or so? Citizens probably would have rallied around SPECIFICS such as that. Weasel wording in regard to Emerson by Hammond doesn’t cut it in my book.
I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!
And now the Crunch Lunch program is part of the core curricula we must save at all costs (pardon the pun)! And is this local author going to continue getting paid for cooking lessons every year?
Why is it if you disagree with Yes on W proponents, you didn’t vote in Bd of Ed elections, didn’t go to Bd meetings and speak out, don’t care about the kids, etc ad nauseum. When you give blank checks with no strings attached, there is no MEANINGFUL ACCOUNTABILITY.
“Why was the School District/Board unwilling to pass a parcel tax to save Emerson, which would have amounted to about $20 or so?”
Do you mean to save Valley Oak? There was around 50% support for a parcel tax to save Valley Oak, even the strongest defenders of Valley Oak agreed it would not have been a good idea to put it on the ballot.
“Citizens probably would have rallied around SPECIFICS such as that.”
I didn’t see that kind of support to be honest with you.
“Weasel wording in regard to Emerson by Hammond doesn’t cut it in my book.”
What is the weasel wording that you refer to?
“I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!”
Did you ask Bruce Colby and he not answer you?
“And now the Crunch Lunch program is part of the core curricula we must save at all costs (pardon the pun)! And is this local author going to continue getting paid for cooking lessons every year?”
Crunch Lunch was part of Measure Q and passed by the voters. As such, it is by law locked into place. It is not part of Measure W and Measure W passing or not passing will not affect it at all.
“Why is it if you disagree with Yes on W proponents, you didn’t vote in Bd of Ed elections, didn’t go to Bd meetings and speak out, don’t care about the kids, etc ad nauseum. When you give blank checks with no strings attached, there is no MEANINGFUL ACCOUNTABILITY.”
The parcel tax actually locks in spending for specific programs at a specific level that is laid out in advance. A parcel tax is actually the opposite of a blank check.
There are four oversight mechanisms in place for accountability:
1. Oversight committee
2. Independent Auditor
3. Elected School Board
4. Public access to the district’s book–ie. anyone can go down as check out to see if the money is being spend as it is intended to.
Just what else do you want in terms of oversight?
Tomorrow, assuming I get a chance to interview Schelen this afternoon as planned, I will have a good discussion of the oversight committee for Measure Q.
“Why was the School District/Board unwilling to pass a parcel tax to save Emerson, which would have amounted to about $20 or so?”
Do you mean to save Valley Oak? There was around 50% support for a parcel tax to save Valley Oak, even the strongest defenders of Valley Oak agreed it would not have been a good idea to put it on the ballot.
“Citizens probably would have rallied around SPECIFICS such as that.”
I didn’t see that kind of support to be honest with you.
“Weasel wording in regard to Emerson by Hammond doesn’t cut it in my book.”
What is the weasel wording that you refer to?
“I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!”
Did you ask Bruce Colby and he not answer you?
“And now the Crunch Lunch program is part of the core curricula we must save at all costs (pardon the pun)! And is this local author going to continue getting paid for cooking lessons every year?”
Crunch Lunch was part of Measure Q and passed by the voters. As such, it is by law locked into place. It is not part of Measure W and Measure W passing or not passing will not affect it at all.
“Why is it if you disagree with Yes on W proponents, you didn’t vote in Bd of Ed elections, didn’t go to Bd meetings and speak out, don’t care about the kids, etc ad nauseum. When you give blank checks with no strings attached, there is no MEANINGFUL ACCOUNTABILITY.”
The parcel tax actually locks in spending for specific programs at a specific level that is laid out in advance. A parcel tax is actually the opposite of a blank check.
There are four oversight mechanisms in place for accountability:
1. Oversight committee
2. Independent Auditor
3. Elected School Board
4. Public access to the district’s book–ie. anyone can go down as check out to see if the money is being spend as it is intended to.
Just what else do you want in terms of oversight?
Tomorrow, assuming I get a chance to interview Schelen this afternoon as planned, I will have a good discussion of the oversight committee for Measure Q.
“Why was the School District/Board unwilling to pass a parcel tax to save Emerson, which would have amounted to about $20 or so?”
Do you mean to save Valley Oak? There was around 50% support for a parcel tax to save Valley Oak, even the strongest defenders of Valley Oak agreed it would not have been a good idea to put it on the ballot.
“Citizens probably would have rallied around SPECIFICS such as that.”
I didn’t see that kind of support to be honest with you.
“Weasel wording in regard to Emerson by Hammond doesn’t cut it in my book.”
What is the weasel wording that you refer to?
“I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!”
Did you ask Bruce Colby and he not answer you?
“And now the Crunch Lunch program is part of the core curricula we must save at all costs (pardon the pun)! And is this local author going to continue getting paid for cooking lessons every year?”
Crunch Lunch was part of Measure Q and passed by the voters. As such, it is by law locked into place. It is not part of Measure W and Measure W passing or not passing will not affect it at all.
“Why is it if you disagree with Yes on W proponents, you didn’t vote in Bd of Ed elections, didn’t go to Bd meetings and speak out, don’t care about the kids, etc ad nauseum. When you give blank checks with no strings attached, there is no MEANINGFUL ACCOUNTABILITY.”
The parcel tax actually locks in spending for specific programs at a specific level that is laid out in advance. A parcel tax is actually the opposite of a blank check.
There are four oversight mechanisms in place for accountability:
1. Oversight committee
2. Independent Auditor
3. Elected School Board
4. Public access to the district’s book–ie. anyone can go down as check out to see if the money is being spend as it is intended to.
Just what else do you want in terms of oversight?
Tomorrow, assuming I get a chance to interview Schelen this afternoon as planned, I will have a good discussion of the oversight committee for Measure Q.
“Why was the School District/Board unwilling to pass a parcel tax to save Emerson, which would have amounted to about $20 or so?”
Do you mean to save Valley Oak? There was around 50% support for a parcel tax to save Valley Oak, even the strongest defenders of Valley Oak agreed it would not have been a good idea to put it on the ballot.
“Citizens probably would have rallied around SPECIFICS such as that.”
I didn’t see that kind of support to be honest with you.
“Weasel wording in regard to Emerson by Hammond doesn’t cut it in my book.”
What is the weasel wording that you refer to?
“I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!”
Did you ask Bruce Colby and he not answer you?
“And now the Crunch Lunch program is part of the core curricula we must save at all costs (pardon the pun)! And is this local author going to continue getting paid for cooking lessons every year?”
Crunch Lunch was part of Measure Q and passed by the voters. As such, it is by law locked into place. It is not part of Measure W and Measure W passing or not passing will not affect it at all.
“Why is it if you disagree with Yes on W proponents, you didn’t vote in Bd of Ed elections, didn’t go to Bd meetings and speak out, don’t care about the kids, etc ad nauseum. When you give blank checks with no strings attached, there is no MEANINGFUL ACCOUNTABILITY.”
The parcel tax actually locks in spending for specific programs at a specific level that is laid out in advance. A parcel tax is actually the opposite of a blank check.
There are four oversight mechanisms in place for accountability:
1. Oversight committee
2. Independent Auditor
3. Elected School Board
4. Public access to the district’s book–ie. anyone can go down as check out to see if the money is being spend as it is intended to.
Just what else do you want in terms of oversight?
Tomorrow, assuming I get a chance to interview Schelen this afternoon as planned, I will have a good discussion of the oversight committee for Measure Q.
Why wasn’t a parcel tax instituted to save Emerson, since that is clearly what citizens were most concerned about? Such an idea was not even on the table for consideration. Why? Because the threat of closing Emerson is too good a stick with which to beat the taxpayers over the head with to force them to cough up more money. Feels like extortion to me.
Hammond is weasel wording any position on Emerson, despite clear citizen concern. He will not say yes, he will not say no. How convenient. Yet a specific parcel tax could have been implemented to save Emerson that citizens probably would have supported.
I asked you about the author being paid for giving cooking lessons to cafeteria workers, bc it was in the Davis Enterprise. I haven’t heard any school official come out and deny what was said in the Davis Enterprise. Thus I think it is reasonable for everyone to assume the Enterprise got this one correct.
The Crunch Lunch program has now become part of the “core curricula”, and must be saved at all costs, when Measure Y comes up in the future (and it will). This is now the system works. Ask taxpayers for more money, develop a new program, convince everyone that we must have it, then must keep it, and cannot let it be lost for lack of funding. If the funding falls short (which it invariably will), then taxpayers need to cough up another parcel tax to “save our programs”.
Notice how saving Valley Oak, a mere facility, was not as important as saving our programs – as if the two were somehow different. Apparently the School Bd didn’t think VO programs were worth saving – oh but oops I got that wrong – when VO closed programs were not lost, just a “facility”. The justification for closing Emerson was the “renovations would be too expensive” – estimated at $16 million. Yet never was the question answered “were those renovations absolutely necessary to keep the school open?”.
Too much double speak for my taste.
Why wasn’t a parcel tax instituted to save Emerson, since that is clearly what citizens were most concerned about? Such an idea was not even on the table for consideration. Why? Because the threat of closing Emerson is too good a stick with which to beat the taxpayers over the head with to force them to cough up more money. Feels like extortion to me.
Hammond is weasel wording any position on Emerson, despite clear citizen concern. He will not say yes, he will not say no. How convenient. Yet a specific parcel tax could have been implemented to save Emerson that citizens probably would have supported.
I asked you about the author being paid for giving cooking lessons to cafeteria workers, bc it was in the Davis Enterprise. I haven’t heard any school official come out and deny what was said in the Davis Enterprise. Thus I think it is reasonable for everyone to assume the Enterprise got this one correct.
The Crunch Lunch program has now become part of the “core curricula”, and must be saved at all costs, when Measure Y comes up in the future (and it will). This is now the system works. Ask taxpayers for more money, develop a new program, convince everyone that we must have it, then must keep it, and cannot let it be lost for lack of funding. If the funding falls short (which it invariably will), then taxpayers need to cough up another parcel tax to “save our programs”.
Notice how saving Valley Oak, a mere facility, was not as important as saving our programs – as if the two were somehow different. Apparently the School Bd didn’t think VO programs were worth saving – oh but oops I got that wrong – when VO closed programs were not lost, just a “facility”. The justification for closing Emerson was the “renovations would be too expensive” – estimated at $16 million. Yet never was the question answered “were those renovations absolutely necessary to keep the school open?”.
Too much double speak for my taste.
Why wasn’t a parcel tax instituted to save Emerson, since that is clearly what citizens were most concerned about? Such an idea was not even on the table for consideration. Why? Because the threat of closing Emerson is too good a stick with which to beat the taxpayers over the head with to force them to cough up more money. Feels like extortion to me.
Hammond is weasel wording any position on Emerson, despite clear citizen concern. He will not say yes, he will not say no. How convenient. Yet a specific parcel tax could have been implemented to save Emerson that citizens probably would have supported.
I asked you about the author being paid for giving cooking lessons to cafeteria workers, bc it was in the Davis Enterprise. I haven’t heard any school official come out and deny what was said in the Davis Enterprise. Thus I think it is reasonable for everyone to assume the Enterprise got this one correct.
The Crunch Lunch program has now become part of the “core curricula”, and must be saved at all costs, when Measure Y comes up in the future (and it will). This is now the system works. Ask taxpayers for more money, develop a new program, convince everyone that we must have it, then must keep it, and cannot let it be lost for lack of funding. If the funding falls short (which it invariably will), then taxpayers need to cough up another parcel tax to “save our programs”.
Notice how saving Valley Oak, a mere facility, was not as important as saving our programs – as if the two were somehow different. Apparently the School Bd didn’t think VO programs were worth saving – oh but oops I got that wrong – when VO closed programs were not lost, just a “facility”. The justification for closing Emerson was the “renovations would be too expensive” – estimated at $16 million. Yet never was the question answered “were those renovations absolutely necessary to keep the school open?”.
Too much double speak for my taste.
Why wasn’t a parcel tax instituted to save Emerson, since that is clearly what citizens were most concerned about? Such an idea was not even on the table for consideration. Why? Because the threat of closing Emerson is too good a stick with which to beat the taxpayers over the head with to force them to cough up more money. Feels like extortion to me.
Hammond is weasel wording any position on Emerson, despite clear citizen concern. He will not say yes, he will not say no. How convenient. Yet a specific parcel tax could have been implemented to save Emerson that citizens probably would have supported.
I asked you about the author being paid for giving cooking lessons to cafeteria workers, bc it was in the Davis Enterprise. I haven’t heard any school official come out and deny what was said in the Davis Enterprise. Thus I think it is reasonable for everyone to assume the Enterprise got this one correct.
The Crunch Lunch program has now become part of the “core curricula”, and must be saved at all costs, when Measure Y comes up in the future (and it will). This is now the system works. Ask taxpayers for more money, develop a new program, convince everyone that we must have it, then must keep it, and cannot let it be lost for lack of funding. If the funding falls short (which it invariably will), then taxpayers need to cough up another parcel tax to “save our programs”.
Notice how saving Valley Oak, a mere facility, was not as important as saving our programs – as if the two were somehow different. Apparently the School Bd didn’t think VO programs were worth saving – oh but oops I got that wrong – when VO closed programs were not lost, just a “facility”. The justification for closing Emerson was the “renovations would be too expensive” – estimated at $16 million. Yet never was the question answered “were those renovations absolutely necessary to keep the school open?”.
Too much double speak for my taste.
“I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!”
Here is our salad rant again.
Because you are so interested in this issue, I was counting on you to investigate and answer that question for us. This is an accountable democracy. You can call the district for these questions yourself.
I fail to be astonished by your accusation. If society demanded that schools should have more the ambiance of a prison, then I think you’d be on to something.
So what if a cooking specialist gave instruction to cafeteria employees. [I have no idea if it happened or not] There is something in work life these days called “professional development”. Employees often receive class-type instruction on ways to improve their work. I don’t see anything out of the ordinary here.
Have you gone to an elementary school at lunch and tried out the lunch? Seems like the best research you could do would be to go there in person and check it out yourself. They have adult prices.
“I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!”
Here is our salad rant again.
Because you are so interested in this issue, I was counting on you to investigate and answer that question for us. This is an accountable democracy. You can call the district for these questions yourself.
I fail to be astonished by your accusation. If society demanded that schools should have more the ambiance of a prison, then I think you’d be on to something.
So what if a cooking specialist gave instruction to cafeteria employees. [I have no idea if it happened or not] There is something in work life these days called “professional development”. Employees often receive class-type instruction on ways to improve their work. I don’t see anything out of the ordinary here.
Have you gone to an elementary school at lunch and tried out the lunch? Seems like the best research you could do would be to go there in person and check it out yourself. They have adult prices.
“I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!”
Here is our salad rant again.
Because you are so interested in this issue, I was counting on you to investigate and answer that question for us. This is an accountable democracy. You can call the district for these questions yourself.
I fail to be astonished by your accusation. If society demanded that schools should have more the ambiance of a prison, then I think you’d be on to something.
So what if a cooking specialist gave instruction to cafeteria employees. [I have no idea if it happened or not] There is something in work life these days called “professional development”. Employees often receive class-type instruction on ways to improve their work. I don’t see anything out of the ordinary here.
Have you gone to an elementary school at lunch and tried out the lunch? Seems like the best research you could do would be to go there in person and check it out yourself. They have adult prices.
“I never got an answer to my question as to whether the School District paid for a Davis author to give cooking lessons to cafeteria staff as part of the Crunch Lunch program. So I will assume that is how part of the funding was spent. Talk about a conflict of interest and waste of taxpayer dollars!”
Here is our salad rant again.
Because you are so interested in this issue, I was counting on you to investigate and answer that question for us. This is an accountable democracy. You can call the district for these questions yourself.
I fail to be astonished by your accusation. If society demanded that schools should have more the ambiance of a prison, then I think you’d be on to something.
So what if a cooking specialist gave instruction to cafeteria employees. [I have no idea if it happened or not] There is something in work life these days called “professional development”. Employees often receive class-type instruction on ways to improve their work. I don’t see anything out of the ordinary here.
Have you gone to an elementary school at lunch and tried out the lunch? Seems like the best research you could do would be to go there in person and check it out yourself. They have adult prices.
I don’t have time to address all the points, but this is one I will address right now:
“Why wasn’t a parcel tax instituted to save Emerson, since that is clearly what citizens were most concerned about? Such an idea was not even on the table for consideration. Why?”
Because, a parcel tax cannot provide money for facilities, and one of the questions is what the facility costs will be. (That’s also the answer to why Hammond cannot categorically say nor can anyone else that Emerson will stay open). They need to evaluate the facility costs. If they need a revenue, it would have to be a bond measure. Now I can only imagine the flack coming from these quarters if they propose that.
What they figured out in the spring is that they could not make a snap judgment on Emerson, and they took it off the table. They still need to evaluate costs of repair and other situations.
So the answer is, a parcel tax proposal in the spring would have been premature (and frankly this was the soonest they could reasonably have gotten a parcel tax on the ballot anyway).
BTW, someone else suggested that there would be a Measure Y. I don’t know what the measure will be called, but there will be another parcel tax. In three years, both of these taxes would sunset Presuming W passes. The question at that point is whether they simply re-up their $200 parcel tax with inflation added or whether it is a $320 parcel tax. There will not be another parcel tax before these two sunset, that I can pretty much guarantee. So if the reference was to an additional parcel tax, that is not going to be on the table or feasible unless W goes down.
I don’t have time to address all the points, but this is one I will address right now:
“Why wasn’t a parcel tax instituted to save Emerson, since that is clearly what citizens were most concerned about? Such an idea was not even on the table for consideration. Why?”
Because, a parcel tax cannot provide money for facilities, and one of the questions is what the facility costs will be. (That’s also the answer to why Hammond cannot categorically say nor can anyone else that Emerson will stay open). They need to evaluate the facility costs. If they need a revenue, it would have to be a bond measure. Now I can only imagine the flack coming from these quarters if they propose that.
What they figured out in the spring is that they could not make a snap judgment on Emerson, and they took it off the table. They still need to evaluate costs of repair and other situations.
So the answer is, a parcel tax proposal in the spring would have been premature (and frankly this was the soonest they could reasonably have gotten a parcel tax on the ballot anyway).
BTW, someone else suggested that there would be a Measure Y. I don’t know what the measure will be called, but there will be another parcel tax. In three years, both of these taxes would sunset Presuming W passes. The question at that point is whether they simply re-up their $200 parcel tax with inflation added or whether it is a $320 parcel tax. There will not be another parcel tax before these two sunset, that I can pretty much guarantee. So if the reference was to an additional parcel tax, that is not going to be on the table or feasible unless W goes down.
I don’t have time to address all the points, but this is one I will address right now:
“Why wasn’t a parcel tax instituted to save Emerson, since that is clearly what citizens were most concerned about? Such an idea was not even on the table for consideration. Why?”
Because, a parcel tax cannot provide money for facilities, and one of the questions is what the facility costs will be. (That’s also the answer to why Hammond cannot categorically say nor can anyone else that Emerson will stay open). They need to evaluate the facility costs. If they need a revenue, it would have to be a bond measure. Now I can only imagine the flack coming from these quarters if they propose that.
What they figured out in the spring is that they could not make a snap judgment on Emerson, and they took it off the table. They still need to evaluate costs of repair and other situations.
So the answer is, a parcel tax proposal in the spring would have been premature (and frankly this was the soonest they could reasonably have gotten a parcel tax on the ballot anyway).
BTW, someone else suggested that there would be a Measure Y. I don’t know what the measure will be called, but there will be another parcel tax. In three years, both of these taxes would sunset Presuming W passes. The question at that point is whether they simply re-up their $200 parcel tax with inflation added or whether it is a $320 parcel tax. There will not be another parcel tax before these two sunset, that I can pretty much guarantee. So if the reference was to an additional parcel tax, that is not going to be on the table or feasible unless W goes down.
I don’t have time to address all the points, but this is one I will address right now:
“Why wasn’t a parcel tax instituted to save Emerson, since that is clearly what citizens were most concerned about? Such an idea was not even on the table for consideration. Why?”
Because, a parcel tax cannot provide money for facilities, and one of the questions is what the facility costs will be. (That’s also the answer to why Hammond cannot categorically say nor can anyone else that Emerson will stay open). They need to evaluate the facility costs. If they need a revenue, it would have to be a bond measure. Now I can only imagine the flack coming from these quarters if they propose that.
What they figured out in the spring is that they could not make a snap judgment on Emerson, and they took it off the table. They still need to evaluate costs of repair and other situations.
So the answer is, a parcel tax proposal in the spring would have been premature (and frankly this was the soonest they could reasonably have gotten a parcel tax on the ballot anyway).
BTW, someone else suggested that there would be a Measure Y. I don’t know what the measure will be called, but there will be another parcel tax. In three years, both of these taxes would sunset Presuming W passes. The question at that point is whether they simply re-up their $200 parcel tax with inflation added or whether it is a $320 parcel tax. There will not be another parcel tax before these two sunset, that I can pretty much guarantee. So if the reference was to an additional parcel tax, that is not going to be on the table or feasible unless W goes down.
I will comment on the salad question as well, I find it interesting that you want me to do the work to look it up and yet, you have admitted that you never bothered to call Bruce Colby and asked. You’re the one who wants to know. It’s irrelevant to Measure W, it is was funded through Measure Q and it seems to be very popular, so I’m guessing it would be in the next parcel tax in three years.
I will comment on the salad question as well, I find it interesting that you want me to do the work to look it up and yet, you have admitted that you never bothered to call Bruce Colby and asked. You’re the one who wants to know. It’s irrelevant to Measure W, it is was funded through Measure Q and it seems to be very popular, so I’m guessing it would be in the next parcel tax in three years.
I will comment on the salad question as well, I find it interesting that you want me to do the work to look it up and yet, you have admitted that you never bothered to call Bruce Colby and asked. You’re the one who wants to know. It’s irrelevant to Measure W, it is was funded through Measure Q and it seems to be very popular, so I’m guessing it would be in the next parcel tax in three years.
I will comment on the salad question as well, I find it interesting that you want me to do the work to look it up and yet, you have admitted that you never bothered to call Bruce Colby and asked. You’re the one who wants to know. It’s irrelevant to Measure W, it is was funded through Measure Q and it seems to be very popular, so I’m guessing it would be in the next parcel tax in three years.
“Notice how saving Valley Oak, a mere facility, was not as important as saving our programs – as if the two were somehow different. Apparently the School Bd didn’t think VO programs were worth saving – oh but oops I got that wrong – when VO closed programs were not lost, just a “facility”.”
And those programs still exist at other campuses, taught by the very teachers whom you admired so much at VO.
“Notice how saving Valley Oak, a mere facility, was not as important as saving our programs – as if the two were somehow different. Apparently the School Bd didn’t think VO programs were worth saving – oh but oops I got that wrong – when VO closed programs were not lost, just a “facility”.”
And those programs still exist at other campuses, taught by the very teachers whom you admired so much at VO.
“Notice how saving Valley Oak, a mere facility, was not as important as saving our programs – as if the two were somehow different. Apparently the School Bd didn’t think VO programs were worth saving – oh but oops I got that wrong – when VO closed programs were not lost, just a “facility”.”
And those programs still exist at other campuses, taught by the very teachers whom you admired so much at VO.
“Notice how saving Valley Oak, a mere facility, was not as important as saving our programs – as if the two were somehow different. Apparently the School Bd didn’t think VO programs were worth saving – oh but oops I got that wrong – when VO closed programs were not lost, just a “facility”.”
And those programs still exist at other campuses, taught by the very teachers whom you admired so much at VO.
On the Valley Oak issue:
I understand people’s frustration at its closing. And I share that. I think it was unique. And I disagree with the last poster, I don’t think you can merely move the programs and replicate them. I talked on my police ridealong last week to the officer who did work at that school, it was a special place that was really unique. He was genuinely distraught over its closure. I don’t think you gain Measure W votes by dismissing the very real concern there.
However, punishing the students because you are angry with members of the school board is not right. And the very students who will be harmed the most are those students who were at Valley Oak and students like them. For that reason, I cannot in good conscience take my frustrations with the board out on those students and students across the district.
On the Valley Oak issue:
I understand people’s frustration at its closing. And I share that. I think it was unique. And I disagree with the last poster, I don’t think you can merely move the programs and replicate them. I talked on my police ridealong last week to the officer who did work at that school, it was a special place that was really unique. He was genuinely distraught over its closure. I don’t think you gain Measure W votes by dismissing the very real concern there.
However, punishing the students because you are angry with members of the school board is not right. And the very students who will be harmed the most are those students who were at Valley Oak and students like them. For that reason, I cannot in good conscience take my frustrations with the board out on those students and students across the district.
On the Valley Oak issue:
I understand people’s frustration at its closing. And I share that. I think it was unique. And I disagree with the last poster, I don’t think you can merely move the programs and replicate them. I talked on my police ridealong last week to the officer who did work at that school, it was a special place that was really unique. He was genuinely distraught over its closure. I don’t think you gain Measure W votes by dismissing the very real concern there.
However, punishing the students because you are angry with members of the school board is not right. And the very students who will be harmed the most are those students who were at Valley Oak and students like them. For that reason, I cannot in good conscience take my frustrations with the board out on those students and students across the district.
On the Valley Oak issue:
I understand people’s frustration at its closing. And I share that. I think it was unique. And I disagree with the last poster, I don’t think you can merely move the programs and replicate them. I talked on my police ridealong last week to the officer who did work at that school, it was a special place that was really unique. He was genuinely distraught over its closure. I don’t think you gain Measure W votes by dismissing the very real concern there.
However, punishing the students because you are angry with members of the school board is not right. And the very students who will be harmed the most are those students who were at Valley Oak and students like them. For that reason, I cannot in good conscience take my frustrations with the board out on those students and students across the district.
“I asked you about the author being paid for giving cooking lessons to cafeteria workers, bc it was in the Davis Enterprise.”
School board elections are in 2009. Perhaps you can campaign on an anti-salad bar platform. Many folks in Davis would probably appreciate it, either because they aggree passionately with your position, or because it would be newsworthy.
“I asked you about the author being paid for giving cooking lessons to cafeteria workers, bc it was in the Davis Enterprise.”
School board elections are in 2009. Perhaps you can campaign on an anti-salad bar platform. Many folks in Davis would probably appreciate it, either because they aggree passionately with your position, or because it would be newsworthy.
“I asked you about the author being paid for giving cooking lessons to cafeteria workers, bc it was in the Davis Enterprise.”
School board elections are in 2009. Perhaps you can campaign on an anti-salad bar platform. Many folks in Davis would probably appreciate it, either because they aggree passionately with your position, or because it would be newsworthy.
“I asked you about the author being paid for giving cooking lessons to cafeteria workers, bc it was in the Davis Enterprise.”
School board elections are in 2009. Perhaps you can campaign on an anti-salad bar platform. Many folks in Davis would probably appreciate it, either because they aggree passionately with your position, or because it would be newsworthy.
I’ll be very interested to hear the response to tomorrow’s story on the oversight committee. I think you will have to look for excuses not to continue to find problems with accountability and oversight.
I’ll be very interested to hear the response to tomorrow’s story on the oversight committee. I think you will have to look for excuses not to continue to find problems with accountability and oversight.
I’ll be very interested to hear the response to tomorrow’s story on the oversight committee. I think you will have to look for excuses not to continue to find problems with accountability and oversight.
I’ll be very interested to hear the response to tomorrow’s story on the oversight committee. I think you will have to look for excuses not to continue to find problems with accountability and oversight.