Town Square

Post a New Topic

Vote No on Parcel tax - support fiscal responsibility and integrity

Original post made by John on Apr 2, 2009

NO PARCEL TAX!
It's not necessary to balance the PUSD budget or to retain teachers or programs even BEFORE federal stimulus funds. And legislative analysts are predicting federal stimulus funds will be sufficient to offset CA State budget cuts.
Currently, our taxes are being used to fund $120k PER YEAR for administrator car allowances. Many of the administrators not only get a monthly car allowance, but also a district issued gasoline credit card.
Currently our taxes are being used to fund $150K PER YEAR for district issued cell phones.
Now how many of you have employers who pay all your transportation costs so you can get to and from your job each day? And give you a district paid for cell phone to boot!
Ask PUSD to do what they are legally obligated to do - ask them to show you expense reports and all gasoline credit card statements.
While teachers are reaching into their own pockets to purchase school supplies, PUSD administrators who already make substantially more than the average PUSD teacher salary, are enjoying perks paid for with our tax dollars.
But are the administrators willing to give up these perks? No Way!
They realize that unlike work days, once they give up their car allowances, their gasoline credit cards and their completely paid for by the district cell phones, it will be a tough sell to get these back.
So they pretend to be part of the solution by offering up a few work days which they can anticipate being reinstated in the near future.
Their behavior not only sticks it to the taxpayers, their behavior sticks it to the teachers as well.

A NO vote on the parcel tax is a vote for fiscal responsibility and integrity.

Comments (3)

Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 2, 2009 at 12:38 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

The pro-Measure G position is essentially anti-taxpayer, anti-property owner, anti-fiscal responsibility.

Casey should show the community that he is worth the perks given to him in his contract by pursuing all means available to him to balance the budget without a parcel tax. His obligation is to the taxpayers, not the employee units.


Posted by Sensibly Save Our Schools, a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Apr 2, 2009 at 1:21 pm

Sensibly Save Our Schools is a registered user.

Stacey,
Agreed! Dr. Casey should remember that his obligation is to the taxpayers.
But I will add that the School Board members also need to remember that their obligation is also to the taxpayers.
They are supposed to be acting on our behalf, not in concert with PUSD.


Posted by Jeb Bing, editor of the Pleasanton Weekly
on Apr 3, 2009 at 7:49 am

Jeb Bing is a registered user.

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.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

To post your comment, please click here to login

Remember me?
Forgot Password?
or register. This topic is only for those who have signed up to participate by providing their email address and establishing a screen name.

The Gay Rights Movement Coming of Age
By Tom Cushing | 32 comments | 1,225 views

Hacienda Business Park evolves to meet demand
By Tim Hunt | 0 comments | 1,023 views

A Norman Rockwell Town
By Roz Rogoff | 6 comments | 1,015 views