|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
At its regular meeting last Thursday, the Chamber of Commerce board of directors unanimously decided to support Measure G.
Chamber board chair Laura Olson along with president/CEO Scott Raty said the decision came after several public forums between business leaders and district officials, as well as two months of research by the Chamber’s economic development and government relations committee.
“The Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce places a high priority on education and supports the Pleasanton Unified School District’s goal to offer the highest quality education and learning environment possible,” Olson said. “For this reason, education is a key component of ‘Pleasanton 2015: A Community Vision,’ the Chamber’s local public policy agenda for sustaining a strong local economy and high quality of life.”
Olson also noted that teachers and support staff are said to have made about $2.3 million in cuts and concessions.
While the Chamber backs Measure G, Raty said the endorsement also challenges the school board to address the long-term stability issues of school funding.
–Emily West
–Emily West
Fortunately the people who would actually have to pay for this proposed tax are not endorsing it.
No surprise here. Realtors have been perpetuating the education myth here for years.
Thank you Pleasanton Chamber! The business community understands the value of good schools and the need to take destiny into our own hands with the parcel tax. Many business owners live in town, so they will be paying for the tax like the rest of us. I am so proud of the Chamber right now. As business leaders, they get it.
Vote YES on Measure G on June 2.
Thank you Chamber! I am one who will gladly pay this parcel tax to support the education of our children here in Pleasanton. Our children are our future and deserve the best education possible to help compete in the global economy. It is not our children’s fault that we are in the economic mess that we are in. It’s time for the citizens of Pleasanton to step up and focus on the future of our society rather than a selfish, short sighted decision to oppose this worthwhile measure.
Fortunately the people who would actually have to pay for this proposed tax are ENDORSING it also!! How fortunate are we to live in a community with high education standards..A parcel tax is a small price to pay for the future leaders of tomorrow..
I urge you to read the posting from former school board member Kathleen Ruegsegger titled (an) Open Response to a Board Member’s Email under the Schools and Kids category. It probably won’t make the top page, as it does not agree with the Pleasanton Weekly position and encourages open diologue about other solutions. It is worth looking over, however, as are many of the past postings on this subject. This proposal is not about whether you support our teachers or our kids. It is about how your money should be spent.
What’s selfish is PUSD administrators using taxpayers’ money to pay their transportation costs to and from work – $120 THOUSAND PER YEAR that could and should be used to fund programs and retain teachers.
What’s selfish is PUSD administrators using taxpayers’ money to provide cell phones to dozens of employees – $150 THOUSAND PER YEAR that could and should be used to fund programs and retain teachers.
What’s selfish is for highly paid administrators to consistently hire consultants to do the jobs the administrators could and should be doing! PUSD is NOT sharing information about those costs with the public, nor do they want the public to know that some of these consultants are former PUSD employees.
What’s not selfish is requiring PUSD to be fiscally responsible and behave with integrity.
What’s not selfish is requiring PUSD to OBEY THE LAW regarding campaign practices and providing records upon request.
What’s not selfish is wanting to ensure that our tax dollars are being used for the intended purpose – providing our children with a quality education.
What’s not selfish is being angry on behalf of teachers who were strong armed into giving up pay while administrators continue to keep expensive perks.
What’s short sighted is accepting the “spin” PUSD has put on the parcel tax without checking actual records.
Steve, if you’re that convinced that your money is going to support our children’s education, then go to the School District Office and ask to see the records…not the information PUSD puts out to the public, but actual records of expenses.
Well I was not sure where I stood on the parcel tax before but since the chamber is endorsing it, I will absolutely be voting against it. The Pleasanton chamber has always been against everything I believe in for every election in Pleasanton.
Is it time to coin the term Predatory Taxation?
Just a reminder that we are restricting all posts related to the June 2 parcel tax measure to registered users of the Pleasanton Weekly Town Square forum. We have found that this keeps the conversations more civil and focused without any restriction on what posters say or the opinions they express.
Well after reading all of the above add the 5 votes from my household to the no on G category.