Town Square

Post a New Topic

NO to the Parcel Tax and NO to businesses who support it

Original post made by John, Another Pleasanton neighborhood, on Apr 2, 2009

Here are more businesses who support the parcel tax. It's their right, but it continues to be mine and every other taxpayer's right to not patronize businesses who choose to use their resources to help PUSD take my hard earned money to pay for Dr. Casey's $1000 a month car allowance....as well as the car allowances totalling $120K PER YEAR for PUSD Administrators. Give the $120K to the Barton Reading Program, or to retain a counselor - let our tax money be used to support education!

NNN - NO TO THE NEVER NECESSARY PARCEL TAX and NO to Zzippee's, UNITS, Delta Lending Group, Chicago Metropolitan Deli and K & N Photographers!

Donate directly to the schools, not to the group that wants you to pay an unnecessary tax!

ZZippes
Quick Printing & Copies

UNITS Mobile Storage

Chicago's Metropolitan Deli

Delta Lending Group
Teri Banholzer, Sr. Mortgage Advisor
(925) 918-2727


K&N KIM & NIKI, PHOTOGRAPHERS
www.kimandniki.com | 925.202.6806

Comments (14)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Get Serious
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Apr 2, 2009 at 11:36 am

Thank you for the list of businesses to support, those who believe in education and our city. Your rant about car allowances is also a non issue in that car allowances have been eliminated by all who were receiving. Chicago's for lunch today.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ptown Family
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Apr 2, 2009 at 11:43 am

Thank you. I will be certain to give my support to these businesses.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by never a parcel tax
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Apr 2, 2009 at 11:46 am

When was Casey's car allowance eliminated? I have not heard that and that is a HUGE sticking point for me.
Businesses have a right to support or oppose any issues but it seems ill advised to make a public statement either way over such a hotly contested issue.
No matter, I will vote no as will every voter in my household. Until everyone takes pay cuts and these step and column raises cease there will never be a way to convince me to vote for a non-needed parcel tax.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 2, 2009 at 11:46 am

Stacey is a registered user.

Yet another rant about how the parcel tax is linked to quality education. What PUSD and the Save Pleasanton Schools people want everyone to believe is that school quality hinges upon only 3% of PUSD's entire budget. WOW! What a house of cards if that is true! What are these people doing with our money that only 3% of the budget will cause a collapse of PUSD?!

P.S. The car allowances have been taken away? Then why did the Independent JUST TODAY report this about Casey' allowance: "He said he will be donating $250 back from the allowance."


 +   Like this comment
Posted by never a parcel tax
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Apr 2, 2009 at 11:52 am

Thanks Stacey, it's people like "get serious" who deliberately attempt to mislead about the issue.
Once again, NO ON THE PARCEL TAX


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 2, 2009 at 11:52 am

Stacey is a registered user.

Get Serious wrote: "car allowances have been eliminated by all who were receiving"

The parcel tax opponents have often been accused of putting out misinformation. Time to look in a mirror.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Concerned
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2009 at 2:19 pm

I have been away from the blogs for a while. Glad to see that someone took up the Tea Party torch. This parcel tax is more dead than a dodo. Not only are the taxes going up now but next year's state budget is already $20 billion in the hole. Can you imagine how much more the taxes are going up. We are in a death spiral with each increase in the tax rate leading to lower tax revenues as people buy less or leave the state. The only people left will be those on the dole and the public sector overpaid workers with their fat pensions and retiree med.benefits living of the taxes. Of course that includes the politicians who are feeding at the top. I will come to the party on April 15th (Good timing with the ridiculous taxes we are paying). I think the taxpayer has been pushed beyond the point of no return. We are mad and frustrated and won't take it any more. Keep coming up with new topics to stay ahead of the censors.:)


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2009 at 2:56 pm

Dr. Casey agreed to give up $250 of the $1,000 per month he receives in car allowance. For the remainder of the school year, this is $750. It is unknown whether he will continue to return $250 a month to the district for the remainder of his term as Superintendent (term ends June 2010). It is also unknown whether Dr. Casey has a district issued gasoline credit card which some other administrators do have.
Dr. Casey lives in Pleasanton within walking distance of PUSD offices.
No other car allowances have been cut, voluntarily or otherwise. (total annual car allowance expense is $120 THOUSAND).

Note: In the Fremont Unified School District, the Superintendent pulled all district credit cards in January to help cut costs. This was done without any prodding from taxpayers. Additionally FUSD no longer provides meals and refreshments for meetings, nor are FUSD employees allowed to attend any conferences or workshops not required by law or to obtain grants.

Regardless of whether or not the perks given to Dr. Casey were done to convince him to come to PUSD, in this economic climate, Dr. Casey should recognize it's no longer feasible nor ethical for him to continue to take any car allowance.



 +   Like this comment
Posted by Get Serious
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Apr 2, 2009 at 2:58 pm

I apologize if I am wrong about car allowance elimination. When I spoke with the principal of our school, he mentioned that all car allowances were being eliminated for 2009-10. If that is not the case, I am wrong. I will dig deeper into the issue. I did, however, enjoy lunch at Chicago's and thanked them for supporting student learning and our community. The only tax that concerns me are local and how we can support our community in order to keep student programs.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 2, 2009 at 3:12 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

Get Serious,

Truthfully, that's why it is difficult to get a clear picture on whether or not the parcel tax is necessary. You hear one thing from one person and another thing from another person. It is best to look at the budget for 2009-2010 for yourself probably. What annoys some of the parents who are against this parcel tax are exactly the district cutting valued programs like CSR before even making other cuts.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2009 at 3:16 pm

Get Serious,
Thank you for being willing to dig deeper. I am in favor of all voters being fully informed about all sides to an issue.
Please go to the PUSD offices and ask to see records, or email your board members with questions. PUSD is legally obligated to allow all residents to view all records and school board members appreciate hearing from community members.
Information on the PUSD website (budget faqs) cannot be relied upon for accuracy or completeness, but school board members can and do respond to specific questions.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Parent of Two
a resident of Val Vista
on Apr 2, 2009 at 3:16 pm

Parent of Two is a registered user.

The car allowances are just a symptom of a greater problem. I'm voting against the parcel tax because this type of line-by-line money conservation should have been done BEFORE proposing a new tax! Maybe if they had looked at the car allowances, and the gas cards, and the solar panels, and multiple other potential areas for savings, they wouldn't have to resort to levying taxes during an economic downturn.

Reactionary, knee-jerk taxation shouldn't be supported. Fiscal spending responsibility needs to be practiced FIRST, then we'll worry about the revenue stream... not the other way around.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by John
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2009 at 4:42 pm

Parent of two....you won't get any argument from me!
As for a line by line examination of expenses...the people who are doing that aren't the ones who work for PUSD!
It's the taxpayers who want to know where all their money has gone, and is going who are evaluating records and uncovering expenses that have been buried under general categories.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by to the reactionaries
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2009 at 6:01 pm

This whole thread is ridiculous. We're not talking about some major human rights violation here. We're talking about a $233 tax. Either you are for it or against it. Vote accordingly. We don't need to start an economic witch hunt against those who support it, nor do we need to launch semi-personal attacks against people like Kathy R. who clearly oppose it.

This kind of rhetoric is why the PW has lost credibility with level-headed folks over the last few months.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


To post your comment, please click here to Log in

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.

Moving to Maine, Maybe
By Roz Rogoff | 3 comments | 701 views

Measure BB could pay to connect Dublin Boulevard to Livermore
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 567 views