One of the key issues that the district faces is the ability to control its own revenue sources. This is actually a statewide problem because as budget revenues statewide get tight, schools feel the pinch.
Right now though the GOP on a national level seems reluctant to admit it, this is one of the worst economic times I can remember in the past 25 years. You have a disastrous housing market which will lower the amount of property tax revenue to schools. You have a basic crisis with gas prices which finally threatening to spread to the rest of the economic sphere.
As Bruce Colby, CBO of Davis Joint Unified noted, the state budget in the face of this recession with be challenge for a number of years. This means that there will be fluctuating amounts of state money coming to school districts.
Despite recent budget crises of its own, Davis Joint Unified is actually in better position than most school districts to weather this storm.
First, they have a strong support base locally that has provided them with a parcel tax.
Second, when a crisis did arise this year, the Davis Schools Foundation was able to raise an additional $1.7 million.
As bad as things looked in January and February, we are getting off almost unscathed in June.
But the problem is that while the Davis Schools Foundation was able to raise $1.7 million this year, it is a one-time influx of money, to help the district on an emergency basis.
According to Bruce Colby’s numbers, an annual parcel tax of $80 would raise the equivalent amount of the $1.7 million. That is $80 on top of what people approved just seven months ago in November.
Will voters in bad economic times be willing to pay out an additional $80? Hard to say.
But there are more complicating factors. Because of the fact this is a Presidential Election, we can expect between 77 and 80 percent voter turnout in Davis. Last year, the turnout was in the 20s for the school board election. Many of those people were committed to school issues and that is why they tend to look toward those type of elections to place the parcel tax that required two-thirds of the voters to approve it.
Given a wider audience, we have to have look to see if that general election electorate will be as supportive of a parcel tax as others.
On the other hand, I think that the electorate is engaged on this issue. As we talked to community members, the schools along with national issues were tops on people’s minds. Still this would have to be a leap of faith. And it is a fight that the district cannot afford to lose. We know what an additional $1.7 million in budget cuts look like. It is not a scare tactic to suggest that if they lose, they will be laying off 100 teachers. It is unfortunately the truth.
I know the district will look into their options and will be carefully planning their course. That is the wise and prudent thing to do, but at some point, I think they have to recognize that they really have no other choice and they are going to have to get good polling to tell them how to pitch this to the public.
We cannot in the end, I think, punish our children for the mistakes that adults have made. The district has worked very hard to get its fiscal house in order, and I think they deserve a shot to not have to lay off 100 teachers.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
There are so many problems with a parcel tax, I don’t even know where to begin…
1.) It’s regressive.
2.) Homeowners without children already pay a lot for education and get nothing in return. This only adds to that problem. If parents want additional services at the schools, they could continue to fundraise or the schools could start charging fees for certain extra-curricular activities.
3.) If it’s done as $80 with no CPI adjuster, than this tax won’t keep up with inflation, and in 5-10 years, the schools will want another parcel tax…just like they’re talking about now.
4.) It assumes that $1.7 million is what the schools actually need – why are we assuming that the schools are being run as efficiently as possible?
5.)Davis already has additional taxes – these taxes, coupled with the soon-to-increase sewer charges, are going to make Davis increasingly unaffordable.
6.) The City appears to spend more time determing how to raise taxes than how to reduce its costs. Give me a break…another parcel tax?
And, yes, of course the economy sucks – it’s terrible and depressing. So, let’s make it worse for people by adding an additional tax. That’s a great idea.
What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. – Mark Twain
There are so many problems with a parcel tax, I don’t even know where to begin…
1.) It’s regressive.
2.) Homeowners without children already pay a lot for education and get nothing in return. This only adds to that problem. If parents want additional services at the schools, they could continue to fundraise or the schools could start charging fees for certain extra-curricular activities.
3.) If it’s done as $80 with no CPI adjuster, than this tax won’t keep up with inflation, and in 5-10 years, the schools will want another parcel tax…just like they’re talking about now.
4.) It assumes that $1.7 million is what the schools actually need – why are we assuming that the schools are being run as efficiently as possible?
5.)Davis already has additional taxes – these taxes, coupled with the soon-to-increase sewer charges, are going to make Davis increasingly unaffordable.
6.) The City appears to spend more time determing how to raise taxes than how to reduce its costs. Give me a break…another parcel tax?
And, yes, of course the economy sucks – it’s terrible and depressing. So, let’s make it worse for people by adding an additional tax. That’s a great idea.
What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. – Mark Twain
There are so many problems with a parcel tax, I don’t even know where to begin…
1.) It’s regressive.
2.) Homeowners without children already pay a lot for education and get nothing in return. This only adds to that problem. If parents want additional services at the schools, they could continue to fundraise or the schools could start charging fees for certain extra-curricular activities.
3.) If it’s done as $80 with no CPI adjuster, than this tax won’t keep up with inflation, and in 5-10 years, the schools will want another parcel tax…just like they’re talking about now.
4.) It assumes that $1.7 million is what the schools actually need – why are we assuming that the schools are being run as efficiently as possible?
5.)Davis already has additional taxes – these taxes, coupled with the soon-to-increase sewer charges, are going to make Davis increasingly unaffordable.
6.) The City appears to spend more time determing how to raise taxes than how to reduce its costs. Give me a break…another parcel tax?
And, yes, of course the economy sucks – it’s terrible and depressing. So, let’s make it worse for people by adding an additional tax. That’s a great idea.
What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. – Mark Twain
There are so many problems with a parcel tax, I don’t even know where to begin…
1.) It’s regressive.
2.) Homeowners without children already pay a lot for education and get nothing in return. This only adds to that problem. If parents want additional services at the schools, they could continue to fundraise or the schools could start charging fees for certain extra-curricular activities.
3.) If it’s done as $80 with no CPI adjuster, than this tax won’t keep up with inflation, and in 5-10 years, the schools will want another parcel tax…just like they’re talking about now.
4.) It assumes that $1.7 million is what the schools actually need – why are we assuming that the schools are being run as efficiently as possible?
5.)Davis already has additional taxes – these taxes, coupled with the soon-to-increase sewer charges, are going to make Davis increasingly unaffordable.
6.) The City appears to spend more time determing how to raise taxes than how to reduce its costs. Give me a break…another parcel tax?
And, yes, of course the economy sucks – it’s terrible and depressing. So, let’s make it worse for people by adding an additional tax. That’s a great idea.
What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. – Mark Twain
Give the kids a break! – how regressive is an $80 (tax deductible) parcel tax? This amounts to eliminating one restaurant trip per year, to a cheap restaurant.
We, as a State, have done a very poor job of funding education so local communities have to do something. There is an immediate need for the money and there really is no alternative to this tax. Davis is spending close to the state average cost per student so it is unlikely that funds are being wasted in any significant way.
Yes, Davis could pull it’s head out of the ground and find better funding sources, but that will take years. The need is now!
Davis relies on education for it’s existence. The community can afford to put a little more money into education.
Give the kids a break! – how regressive is an $80 (tax deductible) parcel tax? This amounts to eliminating one restaurant trip per year, to a cheap restaurant.
We, as a State, have done a very poor job of funding education so local communities have to do something. There is an immediate need for the money and there really is no alternative to this tax. Davis is spending close to the state average cost per student so it is unlikely that funds are being wasted in any significant way.
Yes, Davis could pull it’s head out of the ground and find better funding sources, but that will take years. The need is now!
Davis relies on education for it’s existence. The community can afford to put a little more money into education.
Give the kids a break! – how regressive is an $80 (tax deductible) parcel tax? This amounts to eliminating one restaurant trip per year, to a cheap restaurant.
We, as a State, have done a very poor job of funding education so local communities have to do something. There is an immediate need for the money and there really is no alternative to this tax. Davis is spending close to the state average cost per student so it is unlikely that funds are being wasted in any significant way.
Yes, Davis could pull it’s head out of the ground and find better funding sources, but that will take years. The need is now!
Davis relies on education for it’s existence. The community can afford to put a little more money into education.
Give the kids a break! – how regressive is an $80 (tax deductible) parcel tax? This amounts to eliminating one restaurant trip per year, to a cheap restaurant.
We, as a State, have done a very poor job of funding education so local communities have to do something. There is an immediate need for the money and there really is no alternative to this tax. Davis is spending close to the state average cost per student so it is unlikely that funds are being wasted in any significant way.
Yes, Davis could pull it’s head out of the ground and find better funding sources, but that will take years. The need is now!
Davis relies on education for it’s existence. The community can afford to put a little more money into education.
A parcel tax is specific to a community and is only for their schools. It is everyone’s responsibility, and in everyone’s best interests, to have a well-educated public. When affluent communities vote in a parcel tax, the state is able to step back from its duties of funding quality public education for all. The well-resourced take care of the funding themselves, the poor can’t, usually don’t vote, and have little political power. Affluent areas do the job themselves, less afluent areas suffer the loss in school funding and thus a loss in quality of education.
Parcel taxes introduces an element of privilege into public school funding.
A parcel tax is specific to a community and is only for their schools. It is everyone’s responsibility, and in everyone’s best interests, to have a well-educated public. When affluent communities vote in a parcel tax, the state is able to step back from its duties of funding quality public education for all. The well-resourced take care of the funding themselves, the poor can’t, usually don’t vote, and have little political power. Affluent areas do the job themselves, less afluent areas suffer the loss in school funding and thus a loss in quality of education.
Parcel taxes introduces an element of privilege into public school funding.
A parcel tax is specific to a community and is only for their schools. It is everyone’s responsibility, and in everyone’s best interests, to have a well-educated public. When affluent communities vote in a parcel tax, the state is able to step back from its duties of funding quality public education for all. The well-resourced take care of the funding themselves, the poor can’t, usually don’t vote, and have little political power. Affluent areas do the job themselves, less afluent areas suffer the loss in school funding and thus a loss in quality of education.
Parcel taxes introduces an element of privilege into public school funding.
A parcel tax is specific to a community and is only for their schools. It is everyone’s responsibility, and in everyone’s best interests, to have a well-educated public. When affluent communities vote in a parcel tax, the state is able to step back from its duties of funding quality public education for all. The well-resourced take care of the funding themselves, the poor can’t, usually don’t vote, and have little political power. Affluent areas do the job themselves, less afluent areas suffer the loss in school funding and thus a loss in quality of education.
Parcel taxes introduces an element of privilege into public school funding.
Come on! You just got one and now you want another? I don’t know a single person who will vote for this. This district is rich comared to others yet you never have enough. Maybe it’s time for the schools to quit whining and learn to tighten spending.
Come on! You just got one and now you want another? I don’t know a single person who will vote for this. This district is rich comared to others yet you never have enough. Maybe it’s time for the schools to quit whining and learn to tighten spending.
Come on! You just got one and now you want another? I don’t know a single person who will vote for this. This district is rich comared to others yet you never have enough. Maybe it’s time for the schools to quit whining and learn to tighten spending.
Come on! You just got one and now you want another? I don’t know a single person who will vote for this. This district is rich comared to others yet you never have enough. Maybe it’s time for the schools to quit whining and learn to tighten spending.
Davis Republican brings up very good points, but I disagree on certain parts:
“There are so many problems with a parcel tax, I don’t even know where to begin…
1.) It’s regressive.”
Past Davis parcel taxes have had certain opt-out provisions, for instance for retirees on fixed income.
If you want to argue that it’s a burden to lower income families, then better to spread out the cost of increased school funding across the community to minimize its impact.
Also, the cost of directly charging only the users ends up being even more regressive.
“2.) Homeowners without children already pay a lot for education and get nothing in return. This only adds to that problem. If parents want additional services at the schools, they could continue to fundraise or the schools could start charging fees for certain extra-curricular activities.”
In a sense this (charging fees, fundraising) is even more regressive than the parcel tax, as it puts more pressure/burden on lower income families w/ children who cannot come up with these fees. I sense we would probably disagree over what is to be defined as extra-curricular.
But homeowners w/o children get plenty of benefits. A strong, well-supported public school system generally results in less juvenile crime and delinquency.
Ultimately, a strong, adequately funded school system does more to stabilize housing values than almost anything else. You can compare Davis housing values to many other surrounding communities. Prices may have come down some in Davis, but not as much as in other neighborhoods.
“3.) If it’s done as $80 with no CPI adjuster, than this tax won’t keep up with inflation, and in 5-10 years, the schools will want another parcel tax…just like they’re talking about now.”
Parcel taxes have been passed in Davis to be renewed every four years. This is to make any adjustments for inflation or redefine what the parcel tax will cover, etc. One of the more recent parcel taxes passed in Davis actually came down slightly in assessment over the previous one. That was when the economy was stronger, by the way.
You can do some interesting research on parcel taxes in different school districts in California at http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us
“4.) It assumes that $1.7 million is what the schools actually need – why are we assuming that the schools are being run as efficiently as possible?”
$1.7M is a good starting point for discussion because that is what DSF covered this year. It doesn’t have to be $1.7M.
DJUSD is already trimming ~$1M+ from their budget this year. They are eliminating many lower enrolled courses and this past week consolidated administrative responsibilities (Ginni Davis’ position was eliminated).
“5.)Davis already has additional taxes – these taxes, coupled with the soon-to-increase sewer charges, are going to make Davis increasingly unaffordable.”
I don’t have an answer on the sewer fees because I haven’t followed city issues as closely. I am personally concerned about that. My small regret in the recent elections is that I didn’t see much of any discussion on this.
However, if you want all the park facilities — greenbelts, parks, trees, pools, other public amenities — then it does cost. If you can argue that all of that is unnecessary and a waste, then you begin to build a point.
DPD, maybe you could take on this topic (sewer fees)? Or is there a past posting you could refer us to?
“6.) The City appears to spend more time determing how to raise taxes than how to reduce its costs. Give me a break…another parcel tax?”
The DJUSD is a separate jurisdictional entity than the city.
“And, yes, of course the economy sucks – it’s terrible and depressing. So, let’s make it worse for people by adding an additional tax. That’s a great idea.”
In many ways, it is better to maintain the current quality of education rather than regress in response to the economy. The cost to recover lost programs later on ends up being more.
Maintaining adequate funding for education is the best way to strengthen the economy all around.
“What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. – Mark Twain”
A very common conservative framing of taxes is that they are personal wealth that is unfairly taken.
In the case of public school funding, this is a community investment from nearly every angle. It invests to stabilize or increase the equity in property,
You can look at this from altruistic or purely selfish motives and still come out ahead on this one.
Davis Republican brings up very good points, but I disagree on certain parts:
“There are so many problems with a parcel tax, I don’t even know where to begin…
1.) It’s regressive.”
Past Davis parcel taxes have had certain opt-out provisions, for instance for retirees on fixed income.
If you want to argue that it’s a burden to lower income families, then better to spread out the cost of increased school funding across the community to minimize its impact.
Also, the cost of directly charging only the users ends up being even more regressive.
“2.) Homeowners without children already pay a lot for education and get nothing in return. This only adds to that problem. If parents want additional services at the schools, they could continue to fundraise or the schools could start charging fees for certain extra-curricular activities.”
In a sense this (charging fees, fundraising) is even more regressive than the parcel tax, as it puts more pressure/burden on lower income families w/ children who cannot come up with these fees. I sense we would probably disagree over what is to be defined as extra-curricular.
But homeowners w/o children get plenty of benefits. A strong, well-supported public school system generally results in less juvenile crime and delinquency.
Ultimately, a strong, adequately funded school system does more to stabilize housing values than almost anything else. You can compare Davis housing values to many other surrounding communities. Prices may have come down some in Davis, but not as much as in other neighborhoods.
“3.) If it’s done as $80 with no CPI adjuster, than this tax won’t keep up with inflation, and in 5-10 years, the schools will want another parcel tax…just like they’re talking about now.”
Parcel taxes have been passed in Davis to be renewed every four years. This is to make any adjustments for inflation or redefine what the parcel tax will cover, etc. One of the more recent parcel taxes passed in Davis actually came down slightly in assessment over the previous one. That was when the economy was stronger, by the way.
You can do some interesting research on parcel taxes in different school districts in California at http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us
“4.) It assumes that $1.7 million is what the schools actually need – why are we assuming that the schools are being run as efficiently as possible?”
$1.7M is a good starting point for discussion because that is what DSF covered this year. It doesn’t have to be $1.7M.
DJUSD is already trimming ~$1M+ from their budget this year. They are eliminating many lower enrolled courses and this past week consolidated administrative responsibilities (Ginni Davis’ position was eliminated).
“5.)Davis already has additional taxes – these taxes, coupled with the soon-to-increase sewer charges, are going to make Davis increasingly unaffordable.”
I don’t have an answer on the sewer fees because I haven’t followed city issues as closely. I am personally concerned about that. My small regret in the recent elections is that I didn’t see much of any discussion on this.
However, if you want all the park facilities — greenbelts, parks, trees, pools, other public amenities — then it does cost. If you can argue that all of that is unnecessary and a waste, then you begin to build a point.
DPD, maybe you could take on this topic (sewer fees)? Or is there a past posting you could refer us to?
“6.) The City appears to spend more time determing how to raise taxes than how to reduce its costs. Give me a break…another parcel tax?”
The DJUSD is a separate jurisdictional entity than the city.
“And, yes, of course the economy sucks – it’s terrible and depressing. So, let’s make it worse for people by adding an additional tax. That’s a great idea.”
In many ways, it is better to maintain the current quality of education rather than regress in response to the economy. The cost to recover lost programs later on ends up being more.
Maintaining adequate funding for education is the best way to strengthen the economy all around.
“What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. – Mark Twain”
A very common conservative framing of taxes is that they are personal wealth that is unfairly taken.
In the case of public school funding, this is a community investment from nearly every angle. It invests to stabilize or increase the equity in property,
You can look at this from altruistic or purely selfish motives and still come out ahead on this one.
Davis Republican brings up very good points, but I disagree on certain parts:
“There are so many problems with a parcel tax, I don’t even know where to begin…
1.) It’s regressive.”
Past Davis parcel taxes have had certain opt-out provisions, for instance for retirees on fixed income.
If you want to argue that it’s a burden to lower income families, then better to spread out the cost of increased school funding across the community to minimize its impact.
Also, the cost of directly charging only the users ends up being even more regressive.
“2.) Homeowners without children already pay a lot for education and get nothing in return. This only adds to that problem. If parents want additional services at the schools, they could continue to fundraise or the schools could start charging fees for certain extra-curricular activities.”
In a sense this (charging fees, fundraising) is even more regressive than the parcel tax, as it puts more pressure/burden on lower income families w/ children who cannot come up with these fees. I sense we would probably disagree over what is to be defined as extra-curricular.
But homeowners w/o children get plenty of benefits. A strong, well-supported public school system generally results in less juvenile crime and delinquency.
Ultimately, a strong, adequately funded school system does more to stabilize housing values than almost anything else. You can compare Davis housing values to many other surrounding communities. Prices may have come down some in Davis, but not as much as in other neighborhoods.
“3.) If it’s done as $80 with no CPI adjuster, than this tax won’t keep up with inflation, and in 5-10 years, the schools will want another parcel tax…just like they’re talking about now.”
Parcel taxes have been passed in Davis to be renewed every four years. This is to make any adjustments for inflation or redefine what the parcel tax will cover, etc. One of the more recent parcel taxes passed in Davis actually came down slightly in assessment over the previous one. That was when the economy was stronger, by the way.
You can do some interesting research on parcel taxes in different school districts in California at http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us
“4.) It assumes that $1.7 million is what the schools actually need – why are we assuming that the schools are being run as efficiently as possible?”
$1.7M is a good starting point for discussion because that is what DSF covered this year. It doesn’t have to be $1.7M.
DJUSD is already trimming ~$1M+ from their budget this year. They are eliminating many lower enrolled courses and this past week consolidated administrative responsibilities (Ginni Davis’ position was eliminated).
“5.)Davis already has additional taxes – these taxes, coupled with the soon-to-increase sewer charges, are going to make Davis increasingly unaffordable.”
I don’t have an answer on the sewer fees because I haven’t followed city issues as closely. I am personally concerned about that. My small regret in the recent elections is that I didn’t see much of any discussion on this.
However, if you want all the park facilities — greenbelts, parks, trees, pools, other public amenities — then it does cost. If you can argue that all of that is unnecessary and a waste, then you begin to build a point.
DPD, maybe you could take on this topic (sewer fees)? Or is there a past posting you could refer us to?
“6.) The City appears to spend more time determing how to raise taxes than how to reduce its costs. Give me a break…another parcel tax?”
The DJUSD is a separate jurisdictional entity than the city.
“And, yes, of course the economy sucks – it’s terrible and depressing. So, let’s make it worse for people by adding an additional tax. That’s a great idea.”
In many ways, it is better to maintain the current quality of education rather than regress in response to the economy. The cost to recover lost programs later on ends up being more.
Maintaining adequate funding for education is the best way to strengthen the economy all around.
“What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. – Mark Twain”
A very common conservative framing of taxes is that they are personal wealth that is unfairly taken.
In the case of public school funding, this is a community investment from nearly every angle. It invests to stabilize or increase the equity in property,
You can look at this from altruistic or purely selfish motives and still come out ahead on this one.
Davis Republican brings up very good points, but I disagree on certain parts:
“There are so many problems with a parcel tax, I don’t even know where to begin…
1.) It’s regressive.”
Past Davis parcel taxes have had certain opt-out provisions, for instance for retirees on fixed income.
If you want to argue that it’s a burden to lower income families, then better to spread out the cost of increased school funding across the community to minimize its impact.
Also, the cost of directly charging only the users ends up being even more regressive.
“2.) Homeowners without children already pay a lot for education and get nothing in return. This only adds to that problem. If parents want additional services at the schools, they could continue to fundraise or the schools could start charging fees for certain extra-curricular activities.”
In a sense this (charging fees, fundraising) is even more regressive than the parcel tax, as it puts more pressure/burden on lower income families w/ children who cannot come up with these fees. I sense we would probably disagree over what is to be defined as extra-curricular.
But homeowners w/o children get plenty of benefits. A strong, well-supported public school system generally results in less juvenile crime and delinquency.
Ultimately, a strong, adequately funded school system does more to stabilize housing values than almost anything else. You can compare Davis housing values to many other surrounding communities. Prices may have come down some in Davis, but not as much as in other neighborhoods.
“3.) If it’s done as $80 with no CPI adjuster, than this tax won’t keep up with inflation, and in 5-10 years, the schools will want another parcel tax…just like they’re talking about now.”
Parcel taxes have been passed in Davis to be renewed every four years. This is to make any adjustments for inflation or redefine what the parcel tax will cover, etc. One of the more recent parcel taxes passed in Davis actually came down slightly in assessment over the previous one. That was when the economy was stronger, by the way.
You can do some interesting research on parcel taxes in different school districts in California at http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us
“4.) It assumes that $1.7 million is what the schools actually need – why are we assuming that the schools are being run as efficiently as possible?”
$1.7M is a good starting point for discussion because that is what DSF covered this year. It doesn’t have to be $1.7M.
DJUSD is already trimming ~$1M+ from their budget this year. They are eliminating many lower enrolled courses and this past week consolidated administrative responsibilities (Ginni Davis’ position was eliminated).
“5.)Davis already has additional taxes – these taxes, coupled with the soon-to-increase sewer charges, are going to make Davis increasingly unaffordable.”
I don’t have an answer on the sewer fees because I haven’t followed city issues as closely. I am personally concerned about that. My small regret in the recent elections is that I didn’t see much of any discussion on this.
However, if you want all the park facilities — greenbelts, parks, trees, pools, other public amenities — then it does cost. If you can argue that all of that is unnecessary and a waste, then you begin to build a point.
DPD, maybe you could take on this topic (sewer fees)? Or is there a past posting you could refer us to?
“6.) The City appears to spend more time determing how to raise taxes than how to reduce its costs. Give me a break…another parcel tax?”
The DJUSD is a separate jurisdictional entity than the city.
“And, yes, of course the economy sucks – it’s terrible and depressing. So, let’s make it worse for people by adding an additional tax. That’s a great idea.”
In many ways, it is better to maintain the current quality of education rather than regress in response to the economy. The cost to recover lost programs later on ends up being more.
Maintaining adequate funding for education is the best way to strengthen the economy all around.
“What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin. – Mark Twain”
A very common conservative framing of taxes is that they are personal wealth that is unfairly taken.
In the case of public school funding, this is a community investment from nearly every angle. It invests to stabilize or increase the equity in property,
You can look at this from altruistic or purely selfish motives and still come out ahead on this one.
a problem with a new parcel tax as we have done them in the past is that it would be imposed whether funding was going to fall short or not-a better plan would be to ask the voters to authorize an emergency property tax if the state payment to the school district falls by a specified amount. Such a tax could also be subject to various safeguards to prevent abuse such as requiring a 5-0 school board vote, have the tax increase only be good for one year at a time etc. It might also be appropriate to have other provisions so that not just the taxpayer is asked to pay more but could be combined with agreemensts with the teachers, administrators and classified staff that they would take some sort of a one time slary reduction (1%, a flat some or…)to demonstrate to the voters that in tough times we are all in this together–stan forbes
a problem with a new parcel tax as we have done them in the past is that it would be imposed whether funding was going to fall short or not-a better plan would be to ask the voters to authorize an emergency property tax if the state payment to the school district falls by a specified amount. Such a tax could also be subject to various safeguards to prevent abuse such as requiring a 5-0 school board vote, have the tax increase only be good for one year at a time etc. It might also be appropriate to have other provisions so that not just the taxpayer is asked to pay more but could be combined with agreemensts with the teachers, administrators and classified staff that they would take some sort of a one time slary reduction (1%, a flat some or…)to demonstrate to the voters that in tough times we are all in this together–stan forbes
a problem with a new parcel tax as we have done them in the past is that it would be imposed whether funding was going to fall short or not-a better plan would be to ask the voters to authorize an emergency property tax if the state payment to the school district falls by a specified amount. Such a tax could also be subject to various safeguards to prevent abuse such as requiring a 5-0 school board vote, have the tax increase only be good for one year at a time etc. It might also be appropriate to have other provisions so that not just the taxpayer is asked to pay more but could be combined with agreemensts with the teachers, administrators and classified staff that they would take some sort of a one time slary reduction (1%, a flat some or…)to demonstrate to the voters that in tough times we are all in this together–stan forbes
a problem with a new parcel tax as we have done them in the past is that it would be imposed whether funding was going to fall short or not-a better plan would be to ask the voters to authorize an emergency property tax if the state payment to the school district falls by a specified amount. Such a tax could also be subject to various safeguards to prevent abuse such as requiring a 5-0 school board vote, have the tax increase only be good for one year at a time etc. It might also be appropriate to have other provisions so that not just the taxpayer is asked to pay more but could be combined with agreemensts with the teachers, administrators and classified staff that they would take some sort of a one time slary reduction (1%, a flat some or…)to demonstrate to the voters that in tough times we are all in this together–stan forbes
The Davis schools were saved this year due to the incredible panhandling of the Davis Schools Foundation. Instead of depending on a few wealthy people wouldn’t it be better to spread out the burden more fairly by getting the largest tax base possible? This affordability argument is nonsense. If you can afford to own property in Davis you can afford a little more for the schools.
Support a parcel tax support your schools.
The Davis schools were saved this year due to the incredible panhandling of the Davis Schools Foundation. Instead of depending on a few wealthy people wouldn’t it be better to spread out the burden more fairly by getting the largest tax base possible? This affordability argument is nonsense. If you can afford to own property in Davis you can afford a little more for the schools.
Support a parcel tax support your schools.
The Davis schools were saved this year due to the incredible panhandling of the Davis Schools Foundation. Instead of depending on a few wealthy people wouldn’t it be better to spread out the burden more fairly by getting the largest tax base possible? This affordability argument is nonsense. If you can afford to own property in Davis you can afford a little more for the schools.
Support a parcel tax support your schools.
The Davis schools were saved this year due to the incredible panhandling of the Davis Schools Foundation. Instead of depending on a few wealthy people wouldn’t it be better to spread out the burden more fairly by getting the largest tax base possible? This affordability argument is nonsense. If you can afford to own property in Davis you can afford a little more for the schools.
Support a parcel tax support your schools.
WDF – you make several good points. I think, however, that your basic assumption is that we, the taxpayers, will get more than a $1 back in various benefits for every $1 provided to education. I agree that education provides external benefits – and I did donate to the recent fundraiser. However, my concern is that we are at the point of diminishing marginal returns and an extra $1 in taxes is not going to provide that much of an increase in external benefits. I think that the schoolboard has made some cuts recently and that only serves to prove my point that they had excess funding…that extra $1 may actually be better spent elsewhere (roads, for example).
DJUSD and the City being seperate entities – good point.
Stan Forbes – I think your proposal is really interesting and is something worth pursuing.
Ron Glick – Not everyone who buys a house in Davis is rich…especially if you just bought a house in the past few years…I know a lot of people in their late 20’s/early 30’s who are recent home owners, who chose to spend a lot more to remain in Davis (rather than West Sac, for example) because it is such a wonderful community…but, buying in Davis means tradeoffs and means that you have less disposable income…not everyone living here bought their house 20 years ago for nothing or is rich. Some of us actually have to work and save.
WDF – you make several good points. I think, however, that your basic assumption is that we, the taxpayers, will get more than a $1 back in various benefits for every $1 provided to education. I agree that education provides external benefits – and I did donate to the recent fundraiser. However, my concern is that we are at the point of diminishing marginal returns and an extra $1 in taxes is not going to provide that much of an increase in external benefits. I think that the schoolboard has made some cuts recently and that only serves to prove my point that they had excess funding…that extra $1 may actually be better spent elsewhere (roads, for example).
DJUSD and the City being seperate entities – good point.
Stan Forbes – I think your proposal is really interesting and is something worth pursuing.
Ron Glick – Not everyone who buys a house in Davis is rich…especially if you just bought a house in the past few years…I know a lot of people in their late 20’s/early 30’s who are recent home owners, who chose to spend a lot more to remain in Davis (rather than West Sac, for example) because it is such a wonderful community…but, buying in Davis means tradeoffs and means that you have less disposable income…not everyone living here bought their house 20 years ago for nothing or is rich. Some of us actually have to work and save.
WDF – you make several good points. I think, however, that your basic assumption is that we, the taxpayers, will get more than a $1 back in various benefits for every $1 provided to education. I agree that education provides external benefits – and I did donate to the recent fundraiser. However, my concern is that we are at the point of diminishing marginal returns and an extra $1 in taxes is not going to provide that much of an increase in external benefits. I think that the schoolboard has made some cuts recently and that only serves to prove my point that they had excess funding…that extra $1 may actually be better spent elsewhere (roads, for example).
DJUSD and the City being seperate entities – good point.
Stan Forbes – I think your proposal is really interesting and is something worth pursuing.
Ron Glick – Not everyone who buys a house in Davis is rich…especially if you just bought a house in the past few years…I know a lot of people in their late 20’s/early 30’s who are recent home owners, who chose to spend a lot more to remain in Davis (rather than West Sac, for example) because it is such a wonderful community…but, buying in Davis means tradeoffs and means that you have less disposable income…not everyone living here bought their house 20 years ago for nothing or is rich. Some of us actually have to work and save.
WDF – you make several good points. I think, however, that your basic assumption is that we, the taxpayers, will get more than a $1 back in various benefits for every $1 provided to education. I agree that education provides external benefits – and I did donate to the recent fundraiser. However, my concern is that we are at the point of diminishing marginal returns and an extra $1 in taxes is not going to provide that much of an increase in external benefits. I think that the schoolboard has made some cuts recently and that only serves to prove my point that they had excess funding…that extra $1 may actually be better spent elsewhere (roads, for example).
DJUSD and the City being seperate entities – good point.
Stan Forbes – I think your proposal is really interesting and is something worth pursuing.
Ron Glick – Not everyone who buys a house in Davis is rich…especially if you just bought a house in the past few years…I know a lot of people in their late 20’s/early 30’s who are recent home owners, who chose to spend a lot more to remain in Davis (rather than West Sac, for example) because it is such a wonderful community…but, buying in Davis means tradeoffs and means that you have less disposable income…not everyone living here bought their house 20 years ago for nothing or is rich. Some of us actually have to work and save.
A republican against taxes. How unique.
A republican against taxes. How unique.
A republican against taxes. How unique.
A republican against taxes. How unique.
I saw my original comment was delated. Nice.
That said, you had a school tax and now you want another one?!
I don’t know of a single person who would vote for this including people with kids here. If this is such a wealthy school district, why can’t you spend withn your limits?
I saw my original comment was delated. Nice.
That said, you had a school tax and now you want another one?!
I don’t know of a single person who would vote for this including people with kids here. If this is such a wealthy school district, why can’t you spend withn your limits?
I saw my original comment was delated. Nice.
That said, you had a school tax and now you want another one?!
I don’t know of a single person who would vote for this including people with kids here. If this is such a wealthy school district, why can’t you spend withn your limits?
I saw my original comment was delated. Nice.
That said, you had a school tax and now you want another one?!
I don’t know of a single person who would vote for this including people with kids here. If this is such a wealthy school district, why can’t you spend withn your limits?
no comments have been deleted.
no comments have been deleted.
no comments have been deleted.
no comments have been deleted.
$80 extra a year to help support the quality education in Davis.
Doesn’t sound like armed robbery to me. If the reality is that the state budget is not going to provide for our children, then we as a community owe it to all of us to provide it for them.
Closing the wallet only punishes the students.
$80 extra a year to help support the quality education in Davis.
Doesn’t sound like armed robbery to me. If the reality is that the state budget is not going to provide for our children, then we as a community owe it to all of us to provide it for them.
Closing the wallet only punishes the students.
$80 extra a year to help support the quality education in Davis.
Doesn’t sound like armed robbery to me. If the reality is that the state budget is not going to provide for our children, then we as a community owe it to all of us to provide it for them.
Closing the wallet only punishes the students.
$80 extra a year to help support the quality education in Davis.
Doesn’t sound like armed robbery to me. If the reality is that the state budget is not going to provide for our children, then we as a community owe it to all of us to provide it for them.
Closing the wallet only punishes the students.
HOW ABOUT THIS ONE:
According to the SacBee there are 360,000 children of undocumented illegal aliens in California’s schools. Now multiply 360,000 X $8700 per year per student. Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children.
And that’s only a portion of the financial problem associated with this issue.
HOW ABOUT THIS ONE:
According to the SacBee there are 360,000 children of undocumented illegal aliens in California’s schools. Now multiply 360,000 X $8700 per year per student. Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children.
And that’s only a portion of the financial problem associated with this issue.
HOW ABOUT THIS ONE:
According to the SacBee there are 360,000 children of undocumented illegal aliens in California’s schools. Now multiply 360,000 X $8700 per year per student. Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children.
And that’s only a portion of the financial problem associated with this issue.
HOW ABOUT THIS ONE:
According to the SacBee there are 360,000 children of undocumented illegal aliens in California’s schools. Now multiply 360,000 X $8700 per year per student. Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children.
And that’s only a portion of the financial problem associated with this issue.
I can’t tell you how sick I am of hearing “but it’s for the children” over and over. Enough already. Just admit that you don’t want loose the funding for the schools because you don’t want to see your property values go down further. That’s what this really is all about.
The thing is, Davis has bigger problems. This city, like so many others across california are going to be facing some real crises coming up. Next year and the year after, the shortfall is going to get bigger and bigger. Y’all might want to start learning to live within your means sooner rather then later.
I can’t tell you how sick I am of hearing “but it’s for the children” over and over. Enough already. Just admit that you don’t want loose the funding for the schools because you don’t want to see your property values go down further. That’s what this really is all about.
The thing is, Davis has bigger problems. This city, like so many others across california are going to be facing some real crises coming up. Next year and the year after, the shortfall is going to get bigger and bigger. Y’all might want to start learning to live within your means sooner rather then later.
I can’t tell you how sick I am of hearing “but it’s for the children” over and over. Enough already. Just admit that you don’t want loose the funding for the schools because you don’t want to see your property values go down further. That’s what this really is all about.
The thing is, Davis has bigger problems. This city, like so many others across california are going to be facing some real crises coming up. Next year and the year after, the shortfall is going to get bigger and bigger. Y’all might want to start learning to live within your means sooner rather then later.
I can’t tell you how sick I am of hearing “but it’s for the children” over and over. Enough already. Just admit that you don’t want loose the funding for the schools because you don’t want to see your property values go down further. That’s what this really is all about.
The thing is, Davis has bigger problems. This city, like so many others across california are going to be facing some real crises coming up. Next year and the year after, the shortfall is going to get bigger and bigger. Y’all might want to start learning to live within your means sooner rather then later.
Davis Republican,
You say that you donated but then you are opposed to taxes to spread out the burden, this makes no sense to me. Either you think we should fund the deficit or not. As for those young people who paid up to 1.5 times the regional median to live in Davis. Are you one of them or are you just using them for your anti-tax dogatism? If not for the schools why would young people want to pay that premium to live in Davis?
Dear Oldtimer,
If you think that supporting the schools keeps property values up then it follows that property owners should be willing to pay a little more out of self interest.
Anon, so you want to kill the schools because there are immigrants getting an education? You can make this argument about anything; healthcare, social services, anything. What should we do shut down all government because there are immigrants in the United States? If only we didn’t have an immigration problem. If only we didn’t have a gasoline problem or a housing problem. If only… How about dealing with reality to solve problems instead of slamming poor people coming here for a better life. If only we didn’t have those poor, tired, huddled masses yearning to be free. In that case maybe you and your ancestors wouldn’t be here either.
Davis Republican,
You say that you donated but then you are opposed to taxes to spread out the burden, this makes no sense to me. Either you think we should fund the deficit or not. As for those young people who paid up to 1.5 times the regional median to live in Davis. Are you one of them or are you just using them for your anti-tax dogatism? If not for the schools why would young people want to pay that premium to live in Davis?
Dear Oldtimer,
If you think that supporting the schools keeps property values up then it follows that property owners should be willing to pay a little more out of self interest.
Anon, so you want to kill the schools because there are immigrants getting an education? You can make this argument about anything; healthcare, social services, anything. What should we do shut down all government because there are immigrants in the United States? If only we didn’t have an immigration problem. If only we didn’t have a gasoline problem or a housing problem. If only… How about dealing with reality to solve problems instead of slamming poor people coming here for a better life. If only we didn’t have those poor, tired, huddled masses yearning to be free. In that case maybe you and your ancestors wouldn’t be here either.
Davis Republican,
You say that you donated but then you are opposed to taxes to spread out the burden, this makes no sense to me. Either you think we should fund the deficit or not. As for those young people who paid up to 1.5 times the regional median to live in Davis. Are you one of them or are you just using them for your anti-tax dogatism? If not for the schools why would young people want to pay that premium to live in Davis?
Dear Oldtimer,
If you think that supporting the schools keeps property values up then it follows that property owners should be willing to pay a little more out of self interest.
Anon, so you want to kill the schools because there are immigrants getting an education? You can make this argument about anything; healthcare, social services, anything. What should we do shut down all government because there are immigrants in the United States? If only we didn’t have an immigration problem. If only we didn’t have a gasoline problem or a housing problem. If only… How about dealing with reality to solve problems instead of slamming poor people coming here for a better life. If only we didn’t have those poor, tired, huddled masses yearning to be free. In that case maybe you and your ancestors wouldn’t be here either.
Davis Republican,
You say that you donated but then you are opposed to taxes to spread out the burden, this makes no sense to me. Either you think we should fund the deficit or not. As for those young people who paid up to 1.5 times the regional median to live in Davis. Are you one of them or are you just using them for your anti-tax dogatism? If not for the schools why would young people want to pay that premium to live in Davis?
Dear Oldtimer,
If you think that supporting the schools keeps property values up then it follows that property owners should be willing to pay a little more out of self interest.
Anon, so you want to kill the schools because there are immigrants getting an education? You can make this argument about anything; healthcare, social services, anything. What should we do shut down all government because there are immigrants in the United States? If only we didn’t have an immigration problem. If only we didn’t have a gasoline problem or a housing problem. If only… How about dealing with reality to solve problems instead of slamming poor people coming here for a better life. If only we didn’t have those poor, tired, huddled masses yearning to be free. In that case maybe you and your ancestors wouldn’t be here either.
i reread my comment-it is “sum” not “some”-i really do know the difference-stan forbes
i reread my comment-it is “sum” not “some”-i really do know the difference-stan forbes
i reread my comment-it is “sum” not “some”-i really do know the difference-stan forbes
i reread my comment-it is “sum” not “some”-i really do know the difference-stan forbes
“According to the SacBee there are 360,000 children of undocumented illegal aliens in California’s schools. Now multiply 360,000 X $8700 per year per student. Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children. And that’s only a portion of the financial problem associated with this issue.”
This point came up in the last article on public education that DPD ran a couple of weeks ago.
So you think illegals are a drain on the school system? What would you propose?
Anyway, this topic is supposed to be about local solutions to Davis schools. Waiting around for Sacramento to figure that one out is a waste of time when we have the means to do something ourselves.
“According to the SacBee there are 360,000 children of undocumented illegal aliens in California’s schools. Now multiply 360,000 X $8700 per year per student. Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children. And that’s only a portion of the financial problem associated with this issue.”
This point came up in the last article on public education that DPD ran a couple of weeks ago.
So you think illegals are a drain on the school system? What would you propose?
Anyway, this topic is supposed to be about local solutions to Davis schools. Waiting around for Sacramento to figure that one out is a waste of time when we have the means to do something ourselves.
“According to the SacBee there are 360,000 children of undocumented illegal aliens in California’s schools. Now multiply 360,000 X $8700 per year per student. Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children. And that’s only a portion of the financial problem associated with this issue.”
This point came up in the last article on public education that DPD ran a couple of weeks ago.
So you think illegals are a drain on the school system? What would you propose?
Anyway, this topic is supposed to be about local solutions to Davis schools. Waiting around for Sacramento to figure that one out is a waste of time when we have the means to do something ourselves.
“According to the SacBee there are 360,000 children of undocumented illegal aliens in California’s schools. Now multiply 360,000 X $8700 per year per student. Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children. And that’s only a portion of the financial problem associated with this issue.”
This point came up in the last article on public education that DPD ran a couple of weeks ago.
So you think illegals are a drain on the school system? What would you propose?
Anyway, this topic is supposed to be about local solutions to Davis schools. Waiting around for Sacramento to figure that one out is a waste of time when we have the means to do something ourselves.
I usually think of costs in terms of my monthly salary and my monthly bills. The next Yolo County property tax will include measure Q assessments at $200/year.
That works out to $16.67/month. $80/year is $6.67 per month. Is that exhorbitant?
I usually think of costs in terms of my monthly salary and my monthly bills. The next Yolo County property tax will include measure Q assessments at $200/year.
That works out to $16.67/month. $80/year is $6.67 per month. Is that exhorbitant?
I usually think of costs in terms of my monthly salary and my monthly bills. The next Yolo County property tax will include measure Q assessments at $200/year.
That works out to $16.67/month. $80/year is $6.67 per month. Is that exhorbitant?
I usually think of costs in terms of my monthly salary and my monthly bills. The next Yolo County property tax will include measure Q assessments at $200/year.
That works out to $16.67/month. $80/year is $6.67 per month. Is that exhorbitant?
What about water costs at an increase of $1,000 to $2,000 per year on top of that?
Measures Q?
Schools parcel tax?
Public Safety tax?
= too much burden on tax payers?
What about water costs at an increase of $1,000 to $2,000 per year on top of that?
Measures Q?
Schools parcel tax?
Public Safety tax?
= too much burden on tax payers?
What about water costs at an increase of $1,000 to $2,000 per year on top of that?
Measures Q?
Schools parcel tax?
Public Safety tax?
= too much burden on tax payers?
What about water costs at an increase of $1,000 to $2,000 per year on top of that?
Measures Q?
Schools parcel tax?
Public Safety tax?
= too much burden on tax payers?
Hey Ron,
No one said they want to kill schools because of children of illegal immigrants. The statement was only pointing to a very large portion of the problem statewide and nation wide. Do you think this is right? Sounds like you don’t like people to show you the truth.
No one was slamming the poor. I was raised in a very poor situation. I worked in the fields in the HOT desert of Imperial Valley for 0.85 cents an hour, 10 hours a day. You just happen to dislike something that doesn’t agree with your way of thinking.
Relax Ron and maybe consider getting a high colonic. From your tone you could use one. And yeah Ron, the problem still exists and continues to grow because of people like you.
Hey Ron,
No one said they want to kill schools because of children of illegal immigrants. The statement was only pointing to a very large portion of the problem statewide and nation wide. Do you think this is right? Sounds like you don’t like people to show you the truth.
No one was slamming the poor. I was raised in a very poor situation. I worked in the fields in the HOT desert of Imperial Valley for 0.85 cents an hour, 10 hours a day. You just happen to dislike something that doesn’t agree with your way of thinking.
Relax Ron and maybe consider getting a high colonic. From your tone you could use one. And yeah Ron, the problem still exists and continues to grow because of people like you.
Hey Ron,
No one said they want to kill schools because of children of illegal immigrants. The statement was only pointing to a very large portion of the problem statewide and nation wide. Do you think this is right? Sounds like you don’t like people to show you the truth.
No one was slamming the poor. I was raised in a very poor situation. I worked in the fields in the HOT desert of Imperial Valley for 0.85 cents an hour, 10 hours a day. You just happen to dislike something that doesn’t agree with your way of thinking.
Relax Ron and maybe consider getting a high colonic. From your tone you could use one. And yeah Ron, the problem still exists and continues to grow because of people like you.
Hey Ron,
No one said they want to kill schools because of children of illegal immigrants. The statement was only pointing to a very large portion of the problem statewide and nation wide. Do you think this is right? Sounds like you don’t like people to show you the truth.
No one was slamming the poor. I was raised in a very poor situation. I worked in the fields in the HOT desert of Imperial Valley for 0.85 cents an hour, 10 hours a day. You just happen to dislike something that doesn’t agree with your way of thinking.
Relax Ron and maybe consider getting a high colonic. From your tone you could use one. And yeah Ron, the problem still exists and continues to grow because of people like you.
“Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children.”
If they’re born here, they aren’t “some other country’s children.” They’re our children.
“Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children.”
If they’re born here, they aren’t “some other country’s children.” They’re our children.
“Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children.”
If they’re born here, they aren’t “some other country’s children.” They’re our children.
“Thats a few billion dollars every year taken from the taxpayers to raise and educate some other country’s children.”
If they’re born here, they aren’t “some other country’s children.” They’re our children.
anon,
People like me? I was born here but my grandparents were immigrants. What’s your family story? I just don’t see immigration as a problem like you do. As a nation we have been dealing with this since our founding although we have had a checkered history with things like the Chinese exclusion act. What would you do about immigration? Certainly not paying to educate people who are here is not the answer. Don Shor has it almost correct. I think once they are here either by birth or immigration they are all our children.
As for that colonic are you buying?I’m not the one hating on immigrant kids. I have a better idea just donate the money to the Davis Schools Foundation. By the way, if you want to be an annonymous xenophobe you should be able to take hit as only you know what evil lurks under that mask or are you worried that your shadow knows!
anon,
People like me? I was born here but my grandparents were immigrants. What’s your family story? I just don’t see immigration as a problem like you do. As a nation we have been dealing with this since our founding although we have had a checkered history with things like the Chinese exclusion act. What would you do about immigration? Certainly not paying to educate people who are here is not the answer. Don Shor has it almost correct. I think once they are here either by birth or immigration they are all our children.
As for that colonic are you buying?I’m not the one hating on immigrant kids. I have a better idea just donate the money to the Davis Schools Foundation. By the way, if you want to be an annonymous xenophobe you should be able to take hit as only you know what evil lurks under that mask or are you worried that your shadow knows!
anon,
People like me? I was born here but my grandparents were immigrants. What’s your family story? I just don’t see immigration as a problem like you do. As a nation we have been dealing with this since our founding although we have had a checkered history with things like the Chinese exclusion act. What would you do about immigration? Certainly not paying to educate people who are here is not the answer. Don Shor has it almost correct. I think once they are here either by birth or immigration they are all our children.
As for that colonic are you buying?I’m not the one hating on immigrant kids. I have a better idea just donate the money to the Davis Schools Foundation. By the way, if you want to be an annonymous xenophobe you should be able to take hit as only you know what evil lurks under that mask or are you worried that your shadow knows!
anon,
People like me? I was born here but my grandparents were immigrants. What’s your family story? I just don’t see immigration as a problem like you do. As a nation we have been dealing with this since our founding although we have had a checkered history with things like the Chinese exclusion act. What would you do about immigration? Certainly not paying to educate people who are here is not the answer. Don Shor has it almost correct. I think once they are here either by birth or immigration they are all our children.
As for that colonic are you buying?I’m not the one hating on immigrant kids. I have a better idea just donate the money to the Davis Schools Foundation. By the way, if you want to be an annonymous xenophobe you should be able to take hit as only you know what evil lurks under that mask or are you worried that your shadow knows!
I am going to hit at the fiscal crisis in our schools from a different angle. We passed a parcel tax not that long ago. What did we get for it? The closure of Valley Oak – even before the budget crisis really hit. Now the School Board/District is making huge hints about closing Emerson. How many of you want to pay another parcel tax, ranging anywhere from $50 to who knows how much (I think there was talk about $200 a year), knowing that another school will close anyway – and one that serves the entire west end of town?
Now some of you may argue that if we don’t pass a parcel tax, even more schools than Emerson will have to be closed, or teachers will have to be laid off. I am not sure that is a correct analysis of the situation. In fact, by continually giving the School Board/District a blank check, we are not holding them responsible for the bad decisions they make. Let me illustrate.
Valley Oak was closed allegedly due to declining enrollment – yet the statistics did not bear that out. At most there was a small but normal fluctuation downward at the elementary school level, whereas there was increased enrollment at the secondary level. Yet the School Board/District talked about closing Emerson, which would have seriously overcrowded three schools – our two remaining junior highs and the high school. Enrollment fluctuates all the time – what are you telling me, that DJUSD can’t handle the normal ebb and flow of student traffic?
The fact of the matter is the DJUSD allowed one too many elementary schools to be built, and they knew it as far back as 1998. It was a foregone conclusion some school was going to have to take the hit if too many schools were built.
We also had three vice principals for the high school, a counselor for every grade. Same thing was happening at the junior high level. And note the bloating of administrative positions – Director of Such and Such; Asst Director of Such and Such; Asst to the Asst Director of Such and Such – the list goes on. In my day they had a School Board, Supt of Schools, and someone to take care of discipline – and that was it!
Note also we have DaVinci High School; Independent Study School; King High School; Montessori School; Gate Program; Chinese Mandarin 1, Chinese Mandarin 2, Chinese Mandarin 3…get my drift? We also have extensive music programs, art programs, athletic programs. In the same category as closing Emerson is a discussion of improvements to the High School Stadium! Something is way out of kilter here…
The School Board/District is not prioritizing the basics from the frills. Everything is seen as a necessity, until the Board/District decide they need more money. Then they tend to pay for the frills, so they can argue we need another parcel tax because basic necessities will have to be cut. Everyone is in a tizzy, and lo and behold, somehow we end up with yet another parcel tax – this one less than a year later.
My opposition is not necessarily to another parcel tax. But before I would give one thin dime to the School District, I would want to make sure there were conditions attached. We need meaningful citizen/teacher oversight of the entire budgeting process. Instead, look what we got – a Best Uses of Schools Task Force, hand-picked by the School Board/District – that decided to close Valley Oak. Now VO is being reopened as an “educational center” and touted as “innovative”. In other words, the powers that be in the school system are giving themselves top honors for a botched job of lousy planning. This just doesn’t make sense to me and is insulting to the voters.
As of now, I vote an unequivocal NO on a new parcel tax. Giving more money to the school district will be as if it were being flushed right down the toilet. There has to be some accountability, PERIOD.
I am going to hit at the fiscal crisis in our schools from a different angle. We passed a parcel tax not that long ago. What did we get for it? The closure of Valley Oak – even before the budget crisis really hit. Now the School Board/District is making huge hints about closing Emerson. How many of you want to pay another parcel tax, ranging anywhere from $50 to who knows how much (I think there was talk about $200 a year), knowing that another school will close anyway – and one that serves the entire west end of town?
Now some of you may argue that if we don’t pass a parcel tax, even more schools than Emerson will have to be closed, or teachers will have to be laid off. I am not sure that is a correct analysis of the situation. In fact, by continually giving the School Board/District a blank check, we are not holding them responsible for the bad decisions they make. Let me illustrate.
Valley Oak was closed allegedly due to declining enrollment – yet the statistics did not bear that out. At most there was a small but normal fluctuation downward at the elementary school level, whereas there was increased enrollment at the secondary level. Yet the School Board/District talked about closing Emerson, which would have seriously overcrowded three schools – our two remaining junior highs and the high school. Enrollment fluctuates all the time – what are you telling me, that DJUSD can’t handle the normal ebb and flow of student traffic?
The fact of the matter is the DJUSD allowed one too many elementary schools to be built, and they knew it as far back as 1998. It was a foregone conclusion some school was going to have to take the hit if too many schools were built.
We also had three vice principals for the high school, a counselor for every grade. Same thing was happening at the junior high level. And note the bloating of administrative positions – Director of Such and Such; Asst Director of Such and Such; Asst to the Asst Director of Such and Such – the list goes on. In my day they had a School Board, Supt of Schools, and someone to take care of discipline – and that was it!
Note also we have DaVinci High School; Independent Study School; King High School; Montessori School; Gate Program; Chinese Mandarin 1, Chinese Mandarin 2, Chinese Mandarin 3…get my drift? We also have extensive music programs, art programs, athletic programs. In the same category as closing Emerson is a discussion of improvements to the High School Stadium! Something is way out of kilter here…
The School Board/District is not prioritizing the basics from the frills. Everything is seen as a necessity, until the Board/District decide they need more money. Then they tend to pay for the frills, so they can argue we need another parcel tax because basic necessities will have to be cut. Everyone is in a tizzy, and lo and behold, somehow we end up with yet another parcel tax – this one less than a year later.
My opposition is not necessarily to another parcel tax. But before I would give one thin dime to the School District, I would want to make sure there were conditions attached. We need meaningful citizen/teacher oversight of the entire budgeting process. Instead, look what we got – a Best Uses of Schools Task Force, hand-picked by the School Board/District – that decided to close Valley Oak. Now VO is being reopened as an “educational center” and touted as “innovative”. In other words, the powers that be in the school system are giving themselves top honors for a botched job of lousy planning. This just doesn’t make sense to me and is insulting to the voters.
As of now, I vote an unequivocal NO on a new parcel tax. Giving more money to the school district will be as if it were being flushed right down the toilet. There has to be some accountability, PERIOD.
I am going to hit at the fiscal crisis in our schools from a different angle. We passed a parcel tax not that long ago. What did we get for it? The closure of Valley Oak – even before the budget crisis really hit. Now the School Board/District is making huge hints about closing Emerson. How many of you want to pay another parcel tax, ranging anywhere from $50 to who knows how much (I think there was talk about $200 a year), knowing that another school will close anyway – and one that serves the entire west end of town?
Now some of you may argue that if we don’t pass a parcel tax, even more schools than Emerson will have to be closed, or teachers will have to be laid off. I am not sure that is a correct analysis of the situation. In fact, by continually giving the School Board/District a blank check, we are not holding them responsible for the bad decisions they make. Let me illustrate.
Valley Oak was closed allegedly due to declining enrollment – yet the statistics did not bear that out. At most there was a small but normal fluctuation downward at the elementary school level, whereas there was increased enrollment at the secondary level. Yet the School Board/District talked about closing Emerson, which would have seriously overcrowded three schools – our two remaining junior highs and the high school. Enrollment fluctuates all the time – what are you telling me, that DJUSD can’t handle the normal ebb and flow of student traffic?
The fact of the matter is the DJUSD allowed one too many elementary schools to be built, and they knew it as far back as 1998. It was a foregone conclusion some school was going to have to take the hit if too many schools were built.
We also had three vice principals for the high school, a counselor for every grade. Same thing was happening at the junior high level. And note the bloating of administrative positions – Director of Such and Such; Asst Director of Such and Such; Asst to the Asst Director of Such and Such – the list goes on. In my day they had a School Board, Supt of Schools, and someone to take care of discipline – and that was it!
Note also we have DaVinci High School; Independent Study School; King High School; Montessori School; Gate Program; Chinese Mandarin 1, Chinese Mandarin 2, Chinese Mandarin 3…get my drift? We also have extensive music programs, art programs, athletic programs. In the same category as closing Emerson is a discussion of improvements to the High School Stadium! Something is way out of kilter here…
The School Board/District is not prioritizing the basics from the frills. Everything is seen as a necessity, until the Board/District decide they need more money. Then they tend to pay for the frills, so they can argue we need another parcel tax because basic necessities will have to be cut. Everyone is in a tizzy, and lo and behold, somehow we end up with yet another parcel tax – this one less than a year later.
My opposition is not necessarily to another parcel tax. But before I would give one thin dime to the School District, I would want to make sure there were conditions attached. We need meaningful citizen/teacher oversight of the entire budgeting process. Instead, look what we got – a Best Uses of Schools Task Force, hand-picked by the School Board/District – that decided to close Valley Oak. Now VO is being reopened as an “educational center” and touted as “innovative”. In other words, the powers that be in the school system are giving themselves top honors for a botched job of lousy planning. This just doesn’t make sense to me and is insulting to the voters.
As of now, I vote an unequivocal NO on a new parcel tax. Giving more money to the school district will be as if it were being flushed right down the toilet. There has to be some accountability, PERIOD.
I am going to hit at the fiscal crisis in our schools from a different angle. We passed a parcel tax not that long ago. What did we get for it? The closure of Valley Oak – even before the budget crisis really hit. Now the School Board/District is making huge hints about closing Emerson. How many of you want to pay another parcel tax, ranging anywhere from $50 to who knows how much (I think there was talk about $200 a year), knowing that another school will close anyway – and one that serves the entire west end of town?
Now some of you may argue that if we don’t pass a parcel tax, even more schools than Emerson will have to be closed, or teachers will have to be laid off. I am not sure that is a correct analysis of the situation. In fact, by continually giving the School Board/District a blank check, we are not holding them responsible for the bad decisions they make. Let me illustrate.
Valley Oak was closed allegedly due to declining enrollment – yet the statistics did not bear that out. At most there was a small but normal fluctuation downward at the elementary school level, whereas there was increased enrollment at the secondary level. Yet the School Board/District talked about closing Emerson, which would have seriously overcrowded three schools – our two remaining junior highs and the high school. Enrollment fluctuates all the time – what are you telling me, that DJUSD can’t handle the normal ebb and flow of student traffic?
The fact of the matter is the DJUSD allowed one too many elementary schools to be built, and they knew it as far back as 1998. It was a foregone conclusion some school was going to have to take the hit if too many schools were built.
We also had three vice principals for the high school, a counselor for every grade. Same thing was happening at the junior high level. And note the bloating of administrative positions – Director of Such and Such; Asst Director of Such and Such; Asst to the Asst Director of Such and Such – the list goes on. In my day they had a School Board, Supt of Schools, and someone to take care of discipline – and that was it!
Note also we have DaVinci High School; Independent Study School; King High School; Montessori School; Gate Program; Chinese Mandarin 1, Chinese Mandarin 2, Chinese Mandarin 3…get my drift? We also have extensive music programs, art programs, athletic programs. In the same category as closing Emerson is a discussion of improvements to the High School Stadium! Something is way out of kilter here…
The School Board/District is not prioritizing the basics from the frills. Everything is seen as a necessity, until the Board/District decide they need more money. Then they tend to pay for the frills, so they can argue we need another parcel tax because basic necessities will have to be cut. Everyone is in a tizzy, and lo and behold, somehow we end up with yet another parcel tax – this one less than a year later.
My opposition is not necessarily to another parcel tax. But before I would give one thin dime to the School District, I would want to make sure there were conditions attached. We need meaningful citizen/teacher oversight of the entire budgeting process. Instead, look what we got – a Best Uses of Schools Task Force, hand-picked by the School Board/District – that decided to close Valley Oak. Now VO is being reopened as an “educational center” and touted as “innovative”. In other words, the powers that be in the school system are giving themselves top honors for a botched job of lousy planning. This just doesn’t make sense to me and is insulting to the voters.
As of now, I vote an unequivocal NO on a new parcel tax. Giving more money to the school district will be as if it were being flushed right down the toilet. There has to be some accountability, PERIOD.
I think Stan Forbes’ points are good ones. But let us be honest here with the fiscal situation, the board spent a long time look at ways to cut money, if there were easy money to cut, they would have found it. Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. So for those of you who want to argue that we already gave them a parcel tax, you are correct, but the stakes here are clear.
I think Stan Forbes’ points are good ones. But let us be honest here with the fiscal situation, the board spent a long time look at ways to cut money, if there were easy money to cut, they would have found it. Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. So for those of you who want to argue that we already gave them a parcel tax, you are correct, but the stakes here are clear.
I think Stan Forbes’ points are good ones. But let us be honest here with the fiscal situation, the board spent a long time look at ways to cut money, if there were easy money to cut, they would have found it. Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. So for those of you who want to argue that we already gave them a parcel tax, you are correct, but the stakes here are clear.
I think Stan Forbes’ points are good ones. But let us be honest here with the fiscal situation, the board spent a long time look at ways to cut money, if there were easy money to cut, they would have found it. Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. So for those of you who want to argue that we already gave them a parcel tax, you are correct, but the stakes here are clear.
“I think Stan Forbes’ points are good ones. But let us be honest here with the fiscal situation, the board spent a long time look at ways to cut money, if there were easy money to cut, they would have found it. Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. So for those of you who want to argue that we already gave them a parcel tax, you are correct, but the stakes here are clear.”
Not necessarily. How about a parcel tax with strings attached? I want meaningful citizen/teacher oversight, so that I am convinced the School Board/District are spending tax dollars wisely. Trust me, there are ways to cut money – more than you think.
Remember, Hammond is the highest paid Supt. in Yolo – did we really need to pay him that much? And don’t tell me we need to pay more to get the best qualified, bc Murphy would be a perfect counterpoint to that argument. I know you were all for it, but did we really NEED a school climate coordinator? Or did we just need a school principal who was willing to do his job and determined to stop the bullying? I can almost guarantee there is massive waste in the school system, especially if you allow true oversight by parents and teachers.
“I think Stan Forbes’ points are good ones. But let us be honest here with the fiscal situation, the board spent a long time look at ways to cut money, if there were easy money to cut, they would have found it. Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. So for those of you who want to argue that we already gave them a parcel tax, you are correct, but the stakes here are clear.”
Not necessarily. How about a parcel tax with strings attached? I want meaningful citizen/teacher oversight, so that I am convinced the School Board/District are spending tax dollars wisely. Trust me, there are ways to cut money – more than you think.
Remember, Hammond is the highest paid Supt. in Yolo – did we really need to pay him that much? And don’t tell me we need to pay more to get the best qualified, bc Murphy would be a perfect counterpoint to that argument. I know you were all for it, but did we really NEED a school climate coordinator? Or did we just need a school principal who was willing to do his job and determined to stop the bullying? I can almost guarantee there is massive waste in the school system, especially if you allow true oversight by parents and teachers.
“I think Stan Forbes’ points are good ones. But let us be honest here with the fiscal situation, the board spent a long time look at ways to cut money, if there were easy money to cut, they would have found it. Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. So for those of you who want to argue that we already gave them a parcel tax, you are correct, but the stakes here are clear.”
Not necessarily. How about a parcel tax with strings attached? I want meaningful citizen/teacher oversight, so that I am convinced the School Board/District are spending tax dollars wisely. Trust me, there are ways to cut money – more than you think.
Remember, Hammond is the highest paid Supt. in Yolo – did we really need to pay him that much? And don’t tell me we need to pay more to get the best qualified, bc Murphy would be a perfect counterpoint to that argument. I know you were all for it, but did we really NEED a school climate coordinator? Or did we just need a school principal who was willing to do his job and determined to stop the bullying? I can almost guarantee there is massive waste in the school system, especially if you allow true oversight by parents and teachers.
“I think Stan Forbes’ points are good ones. But let us be honest here with the fiscal situation, the board spent a long time look at ways to cut money, if there were easy money to cut, they would have found it. Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. So for those of you who want to argue that we already gave them a parcel tax, you are correct, but the stakes here are clear.”
Not necessarily. How about a parcel tax with strings attached? I want meaningful citizen/teacher oversight, so that I am convinced the School Board/District are spending tax dollars wisely. Trust me, there are ways to cut money – more than you think.
Remember, Hammond is the highest paid Supt. in Yolo – did we really need to pay him that much? And don’t tell me we need to pay more to get the best qualified, bc Murphy would be a perfect counterpoint to that argument. I know you were all for it, but did we really NEED a school climate coordinator? Or did we just need a school principal who was willing to do his job and determined to stop the bullying? I can almost guarantee there is massive waste in the school system, especially if you allow true oversight by parents and teachers.
different outlook:
Your arguments sound very similar to those of “former teacher” from the previous comment thread a couple of weeks ago on Davis schools. I presume you may be the same person.
“Note also we have DaVinci High School; Independent Study School; King High School; Montessori School; Gate Program; Chinese Mandarin 1, Chinese Mandarin 2, Chinese Mandarin 3…get my drift? We also have extensive music programs, art programs, athletic programs. In the same category as closing Emerson is a discussion of improvements to the High School Stadium! Something is way out of kilter here…”
In DJUSD, Mandarin Chinese is the third most spoken first language among students. Spanish and Korean are the top two. It is widely known that Mandarin Chinese is the most spoken first language in the world. China has the realistic potential to have the strongest economy in the world. Given all that, I would probably prefer my kids to take Mandarin over French or German. Why is Mandarin Chinese something that is a frill in DJUSD?
“Valley Oak was closed allegedly due to declining enrollment – yet the statistics did not bear that out.”
It was closed because enrollments do not currently exist to sustain 9 K-6 elementaries in the district.
“We also had three vice principals for the high school, a counselor for every grade. Same thing was happening at the junior high level. And note the bloating of administrative positions – Director of Such and Such; Asst Director of Such and Such; Asst to the Asst Director of Such and Such – the list goes on. In my day they had a School Board, Supt of Schools, and someone to take care of discipline – and that was it!”
How big was your school? district?
What do you propose to be an appropriate size for administrative staff for DJUSD? Cut everything except the SI?
different outlook:
Your arguments sound very similar to those of “former teacher” from the previous comment thread a couple of weeks ago on Davis schools. I presume you may be the same person.
“Note also we have DaVinci High School; Independent Study School; King High School; Montessori School; Gate Program; Chinese Mandarin 1, Chinese Mandarin 2, Chinese Mandarin 3…get my drift? We also have extensive music programs, art programs, athletic programs. In the same category as closing Emerson is a discussion of improvements to the High School Stadium! Something is way out of kilter here…”
In DJUSD, Mandarin Chinese is the third most spoken first language among students. Spanish and Korean are the top two. It is widely known that Mandarin Chinese is the most spoken first language in the world. China has the realistic potential to have the strongest economy in the world. Given all that, I would probably prefer my kids to take Mandarin over French or German. Why is Mandarin Chinese something that is a frill in DJUSD?
“Valley Oak was closed allegedly due to declining enrollment – yet the statistics did not bear that out.”
It was closed because enrollments do not currently exist to sustain 9 K-6 elementaries in the district.
“We also had three vice principals for the high school, a counselor for every grade. Same thing was happening at the junior high level. And note the bloating of administrative positions – Director of Such and Such; Asst Director of Such and Such; Asst to the Asst Director of Such and Such – the list goes on. In my day they had a School Board, Supt of Schools, and someone to take care of discipline – and that was it!”
How big was your school? district?
What do you propose to be an appropriate size for administrative staff for DJUSD? Cut everything except the SI?
different outlook:
Your arguments sound very similar to those of “former teacher” from the previous comment thread a couple of weeks ago on Davis schools. I presume you may be the same person.
“Note also we have DaVinci High School; Independent Study School; King High School; Montessori School; Gate Program; Chinese Mandarin 1, Chinese Mandarin 2, Chinese Mandarin 3…get my drift? We also have extensive music programs, art programs, athletic programs. In the same category as closing Emerson is a discussion of improvements to the High School Stadium! Something is way out of kilter here…”
In DJUSD, Mandarin Chinese is the third most spoken first language among students. Spanish and Korean are the top two. It is widely known that Mandarin Chinese is the most spoken first language in the world. China has the realistic potential to have the strongest economy in the world. Given all that, I would probably prefer my kids to take Mandarin over French or German. Why is Mandarin Chinese something that is a frill in DJUSD?
“Valley Oak was closed allegedly due to declining enrollment – yet the statistics did not bear that out.”
It was closed because enrollments do not currently exist to sustain 9 K-6 elementaries in the district.
“We also had three vice principals for the high school, a counselor for every grade. Same thing was happening at the junior high level. And note the bloating of administrative positions – Director of Such and Such; Asst Director of Such and Such; Asst to the Asst Director of Such and Such – the list goes on. In my day they had a School Board, Supt of Schools, and someone to take care of discipline – and that was it!”
How big was your school? district?
What do you propose to be an appropriate size for administrative staff for DJUSD? Cut everything except the SI?
different outlook:
Your arguments sound very similar to those of “former teacher” from the previous comment thread a couple of weeks ago on Davis schools. I presume you may be the same person.
“Note also we have DaVinci High School; Independent Study School; King High School; Montessori School; Gate Program; Chinese Mandarin 1, Chinese Mandarin 2, Chinese Mandarin 3…get my drift? We also have extensive music programs, art programs, athletic programs. In the same category as closing Emerson is a discussion of improvements to the High School Stadium! Something is way out of kilter here…”
In DJUSD, Mandarin Chinese is the third most spoken first language among students. Spanish and Korean are the top two. It is widely known that Mandarin Chinese is the most spoken first language in the world. China has the realistic potential to have the strongest economy in the world. Given all that, I would probably prefer my kids to take Mandarin over French or German. Why is Mandarin Chinese something that is a frill in DJUSD?
“Valley Oak was closed allegedly due to declining enrollment – yet the statistics did not bear that out.”
It was closed because enrollments do not currently exist to sustain 9 K-6 elementaries in the district.
“We also had three vice principals for the high school, a counselor for every grade. Same thing was happening at the junior high level. And note the bloating of administrative positions – Director of Such and Such; Asst Director of Such and Such; Asst to the Asst Director of Such and Such – the list goes on. In my day they had a School Board, Supt of Schools, and someone to take care of discipline – and that was it!”
How big was your school? district?
What do you propose to be an appropriate size for administrative staff for DJUSD? Cut everything except the SI?
different outlook…:
“My opposition is not necessarily to another parcel tax. But before I would give one thin dime to the School District, I would want to make sure there were conditions attached. We need meaningful citizen/teacher oversight of the entire budgeting process. Instead, look what we got – a Best Uses of Schools Task Force, hand-picked by the School Board/District – that decided to close Valley Oak. Now VO is being reopened as an “educational center” and touted as “innovative”. In other words, the powers that be in the school system are giving themselves top honors for a botched job of lousy planning. This just doesn’t make sense to me and is insulting to the voters.”
Did you ask any school board member to be on the Measure Q oversight committee? or the Best Uses Taskforce? There’s always a chance that you can ask and they will appoint you.
Short of that, why can’t this blog be an oversight committee? I assure you that school board members check this place out from time to time. There are school activists who are reading, if not posting.
All I would ask is a little more concrete evidence to support your criticisms.
“Remember, Hammond is the highest paid Supt. in Yolo – did we really need to pay him that much? And don’t tell me we need to pay more to get the best qualified, bc Murphy would be a perfect counterpoint to that argument. I know you were all for it, but did we really NEED a school climate coordinator? Or did we just need a school principal who was willing to do his job and determined to stop the bullying?”
Do you think Hammond isn’t worth that salary?
If Murphy contributed to this current mess, I don’t see that it made sense for him to stay in office.
At a school board meeting, I heard that the climate coordinator position (Mel Lewis) was paid for w/ categorical funds that don’t go to paying for teachers. So cutting that position would not have helped w/ the bigger deficit issue. If I am wrong on this, I wish to be corrected.
different outlook…:
“My opposition is not necessarily to another parcel tax. But before I would give one thin dime to the School District, I would want to make sure there were conditions attached. We need meaningful citizen/teacher oversight of the entire budgeting process. Instead, look what we got – a Best Uses of Schools Task Force, hand-picked by the School Board/District – that decided to close Valley Oak. Now VO is being reopened as an “educational center” and touted as “innovative”. In other words, the powers that be in the school system are giving themselves top honors for a botched job of lousy planning. This just doesn’t make sense to me and is insulting to the voters.”
Did you ask any school board member to be on the Measure Q oversight committee? or the Best Uses Taskforce? There’s always a chance that you can ask and they will appoint you.
Short of that, why can’t this blog be an oversight committee? I assure you that school board members check this place out from time to time. There are school activists who are reading, if not posting.
All I would ask is a little more concrete evidence to support your criticisms.
“Remember, Hammond is the highest paid Supt. in Yolo – did we really need to pay him that much? And don’t tell me we need to pay more to get the best qualified, bc Murphy would be a perfect counterpoint to that argument. I know you were all for it, but did we really NEED a school climate coordinator? Or did we just need a school principal who was willing to do his job and determined to stop the bullying?”
Do you think Hammond isn’t worth that salary?
If Murphy contributed to this current mess, I don’t see that it made sense for him to stay in office.
At a school board meeting, I heard that the climate coordinator position (Mel Lewis) was paid for w/ categorical funds that don’t go to paying for teachers. So cutting that position would not have helped w/ the bigger deficit issue. If I am wrong on this, I wish to be corrected.
different outlook…:
“My opposition is not necessarily to another parcel tax. But before I would give one thin dime to the School District, I would want to make sure there were conditions attached. We need meaningful citizen/teacher oversight of the entire budgeting process. Instead, look what we got – a Best Uses of Schools Task Force, hand-picked by the School Board/District – that decided to close Valley Oak. Now VO is being reopened as an “educational center” and touted as “innovative”. In other words, the powers that be in the school system are giving themselves top honors for a botched job of lousy planning. This just doesn’t make sense to me and is insulting to the voters.”
Did you ask any school board member to be on the Measure Q oversight committee? or the Best Uses Taskforce? There’s always a chance that you can ask and they will appoint you.
Short of that, why can’t this blog be an oversight committee? I assure you that school board members check this place out from time to time. There are school activists who are reading, if not posting.
All I would ask is a little more concrete evidence to support your criticisms.
“Remember, Hammond is the highest paid Supt. in Yolo – did we really need to pay him that much? And don’t tell me we need to pay more to get the best qualified, bc Murphy would be a perfect counterpoint to that argument. I know you were all for it, but did we really NEED a school climate coordinator? Or did we just need a school principal who was willing to do his job and determined to stop the bullying?”
Do you think Hammond isn’t worth that salary?
If Murphy contributed to this current mess, I don’t see that it made sense for him to stay in office.
At a school board meeting, I heard that the climate coordinator position (Mel Lewis) was paid for w/ categorical funds that don’t go to paying for teachers. So cutting that position would not have helped w/ the bigger deficit issue. If I am wrong on this, I wish to be corrected.
different outlook…:
“My opposition is not necessarily to another parcel tax. But before I would give one thin dime to the School District, I would want to make sure there were conditions attached. We need meaningful citizen/teacher oversight of the entire budgeting process. Instead, look what we got – a Best Uses of Schools Task Force, hand-picked by the School Board/District – that decided to close Valley Oak. Now VO is being reopened as an “educational center” and touted as “innovative”. In other words, the powers that be in the school system are giving themselves top honors for a botched job of lousy planning. This just doesn’t make sense to me and is insulting to the voters.”
Did you ask any school board member to be on the Measure Q oversight committee? or the Best Uses Taskforce? There’s always a chance that you can ask and they will appoint you.
Short of that, why can’t this blog be an oversight committee? I assure you that school board members check this place out from time to time. There are school activists who are reading, if not posting.
All I would ask is a little more concrete evidence to support your criticisms.
“Remember, Hammond is the highest paid Supt. in Yolo – did we really need to pay him that much? And don’t tell me we need to pay more to get the best qualified, bc Murphy would be a perfect counterpoint to that argument. I know you were all for it, but did we really NEED a school climate coordinator? Or did we just need a school principal who was willing to do his job and determined to stop the bullying?”
Do you think Hammond isn’t worth that salary?
If Murphy contributed to this current mess, I don’t see that it made sense for him to stay in office.
At a school board meeting, I heard that the climate coordinator position (Mel Lewis) was paid for w/ categorical funds that don’t go to paying for teachers. So cutting that position would not have helped w/ the bigger deficit issue. If I am wrong on this, I wish to be corrected.
Doug Paul Davis said…
“…Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. ….
The problem is, recent history indicates that those are also very likely even if a parcel tax is passed. The primary funding problem is at the state level.
I think a parcel tax would be a very hard thing to sell to Davis voters right now, and probably for the next year or so.
Doug Paul Davis said…
“…Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. ….
The problem is, recent history indicates that those are also very likely even if a parcel tax is passed. The primary funding problem is at the state level.
I think a parcel tax would be a very hard thing to sell to Davis voters right now, and probably for the next year or so.
Doug Paul Davis said…
“…Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. ….
The problem is, recent history indicates that those are also very likely even if a parcel tax is passed. The primary funding problem is at the state level.
I think a parcel tax would be a very hard thing to sell to Davis voters right now, and probably for the next year or so.
Doug Paul Davis said…
“…Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. ….
The problem is, recent history indicates that those are also very likely even if a parcel tax is passed. The primary funding problem is at the state level.
I think a parcel tax would be a very hard thing to sell to Davis voters right now, and probably for the next year or so.
wdf,
Different Outlook was bringing up Murphy as an example to show that paying top dollar does not mean you will get a top notch superintendant. I highly doubt Different Outlook was arguing that Murphy should have been kept.
Regarding the parcel tax:
I think we can all agree that $80/year is not a burden to most Davis households however I bet that more and more households are feeling the “death of a 1000 cuts” from the plethora of “small” taxes, assessments, fees, charges, etc… Not to mention inflation which, we all know from visiting the gas station and the grocery store, is much higher than the 4% the federal government claims it is.
wdf,
Different Outlook was bringing up Murphy as an example to show that paying top dollar does not mean you will get a top notch superintendant. I highly doubt Different Outlook was arguing that Murphy should have been kept.
Regarding the parcel tax:
I think we can all agree that $80/year is not a burden to most Davis households however I bet that more and more households are feeling the “death of a 1000 cuts” from the plethora of “small” taxes, assessments, fees, charges, etc… Not to mention inflation which, we all know from visiting the gas station and the grocery store, is much higher than the 4% the federal government claims it is.
wdf,
Different Outlook was bringing up Murphy as an example to show that paying top dollar does not mean you will get a top notch superintendant. I highly doubt Different Outlook was arguing that Murphy should have been kept.
Regarding the parcel tax:
I think we can all agree that $80/year is not a burden to most Davis households however I bet that more and more households are feeling the “death of a 1000 cuts” from the plethora of “small” taxes, assessments, fees, charges, etc… Not to mention inflation which, we all know from visiting the gas station and the grocery store, is much higher than the 4% the federal government claims it is.
wdf,
Different Outlook was bringing up Murphy as an example to show that paying top dollar does not mean you will get a top notch superintendant. I highly doubt Different Outlook was arguing that Murphy should have been kept.
Regarding the parcel tax:
I think we can all agree that $80/year is not a burden to most Davis households however I bet that more and more households are feeling the “death of a 1000 cuts” from the plethora of “small” taxes, assessments, fees, charges, etc… Not to mention inflation which, we all know from visiting the gas station and the grocery store, is much higher than the 4% the federal government claims it is.
“Don Shor said…
Doug Paul Davis said…
“…Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. ….”
The problem is, recent history indicates that those are also very likely even if a parcel tax is passed. The primary funding problem is at the state level.
I think a parcel tax would be a very hard thing to sell to Davis voters right now, and probably for the next year or so.”
That’s a good point. Also the current lousy economy that anon 10:01 mentions (thanks also for clarifying the point about Murphy)will definitely dampen some enthusiasm for this.
Nevertheless, the school board and district will get criticized the other way if they don’t try every option. They really don’t have a choice but to come up with something for the ballot.
Stan Forbes’ suggestion, along with a Mr. Bridge at a recent board meeting, for a trigger to implement the assessment for a lack of state funds to DJUSD is probably one of the better ideas.
“Don Shor said…
Doug Paul Davis said…
“…Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. ….”
The problem is, recent history indicates that those are also very likely even if a parcel tax is passed. The primary funding problem is at the state level.
I think a parcel tax would be a very hard thing to sell to Davis voters right now, and probably for the next year or so.”
That’s a good point. Also the current lousy economy that anon 10:01 mentions (thanks also for clarifying the point about Murphy)will definitely dampen some enthusiasm for this.
Nevertheless, the school board and district will get criticized the other way if they don’t try every option. They really don’t have a choice but to come up with something for the ballot.
Stan Forbes’ suggestion, along with a Mr. Bridge at a recent board meeting, for a trigger to implement the assessment for a lack of state funds to DJUSD is probably one of the better ideas.
“Don Shor said…
Doug Paul Davis said…
“…Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. ….”
The problem is, recent history indicates that those are also very likely even if a parcel tax is passed. The primary funding problem is at the state level.
I think a parcel tax would be a very hard thing to sell to Davis voters right now, and probably for the next year or so.”
That’s a good point. Also the current lousy economy that anon 10:01 mentions (thanks also for clarifying the point about Murphy)will definitely dampen some enthusiasm for this.
Nevertheless, the school board and district will get criticized the other way if they don’t try every option. They really don’t have a choice but to come up with something for the ballot.
Stan Forbes’ suggestion, along with a Mr. Bridge at a recent board meeting, for a trigger to implement the assessment for a lack of state funds to DJUSD is probably one of the better ideas.
“Don Shor said…
Doug Paul Davis said…
“…Instead we have a choice, we can close schools, lay off teachers, or cut programs. That’s it. If we do not pass another parcel tax, those are the possibilities. ….”
The problem is, recent history indicates that those are also very likely even if a parcel tax is passed. The primary funding problem is at the state level.
I think a parcel tax would be a very hard thing to sell to Davis voters right now, and probably for the next year or so.”
That’s a good point. Also the current lousy economy that anon 10:01 mentions (thanks also for clarifying the point about Murphy)will definitely dampen some enthusiasm for this.
Nevertheless, the school board and district will get criticized the other way if they don’t try every option. They really don’t have a choice but to come up with something for the ballot.
Stan Forbes’ suggestion, along with a Mr. Bridge at a recent board meeting, for a trigger to implement the assessment for a lack of state funds to DJUSD is probably one of the better ideas.
A NEW TAX?
No way. There is no end to taxing. And Murphy is still ripping off the taxpayers.
A NEW TAX?
No way. There is no end to taxing. And Murphy is still ripping off the taxpayers.
A NEW TAX?
No way. There is no end to taxing. And Murphy is still ripping off the taxpayers.
A NEW TAX?
No way. There is no end to taxing. And Murphy is still ripping off the taxpayers.
To Don Shor,
I think Anon was right. We are raising Mexico’s children. They may live here but their parents broke the law and came uninvited. So now they’re “our children” and we have to pay for an illegal act of someone else?
Do you think this is correct? I am through paying for the illegal acts other people choose to do. I do not blame the children. How many of the children of illegals have fathers who abandoned them and went back to mexico, leaving the mothers and taxpayers responsible? I have firsthand knowledge of this problem and the numbers would surprise you.
It is unfortunate that those people who think like you cannot be burdened with the entire debt of this kind of problem. If that could be done it would be interesting to note your opinion.
To Don Shor,
I think Anon was right. We are raising Mexico’s children. They may live here but their parents broke the law and came uninvited. So now they’re “our children” and we have to pay for an illegal act of someone else?
Do you think this is correct? I am through paying for the illegal acts other people choose to do. I do not blame the children. How many of the children of illegals have fathers who abandoned them and went back to mexico, leaving the mothers and taxpayers responsible? I have firsthand knowledge of this problem and the numbers would surprise you.
It is unfortunate that those people who think like you cannot be burdened with the entire debt of this kind of problem. If that could be done it would be interesting to note your opinion.
To Don Shor,
I think Anon was right. We are raising Mexico’s children. They may live here but their parents broke the law and came uninvited. So now they’re “our children” and we have to pay for an illegal act of someone else?
Do you think this is correct? I am through paying for the illegal acts other people choose to do. I do not blame the children. How many of the children of illegals have fathers who abandoned them and went back to mexico, leaving the mothers and taxpayers responsible? I have firsthand knowledge of this problem and the numbers would surprise you.
It is unfortunate that those people who think like you cannot be burdened with the entire debt of this kind of problem. If that could be done it would be interesting to note your opinion.
To Don Shor,
I think Anon was right. We are raising Mexico’s children. They may live here but their parents broke the law and came uninvited. So now they’re “our children” and we have to pay for an illegal act of someone else?
Do you think this is correct? I am through paying for the illegal acts other people choose to do. I do not blame the children. How many of the children of illegals have fathers who abandoned them and went back to mexico, leaving the mothers and taxpayers responsible? I have firsthand knowledge of this problem and the numbers would surprise you.
It is unfortunate that those people who think like you cannot be burdened with the entire debt of this kind of problem. If that could be done it would be interesting to note your opinion.