Key findings from the report (not the news article):
- 85% say better use of existing state funds would
improve schools.
- When asked to choose among three options for improving public education, 49% say that better use of existing funds is the answer. Only 6 percent say increased funding is the key.
- 54% would vote yes on a new parcel tax to provide more money for local schools.
Posted by Sandy, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2009 at 6:33 am Sandy is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Interesting article and report, Carl. Thanks for sharing the links.
My reaction when I read this section of the article...
"Los Angeles residents were among the least satisfied with their local public schools, and had by far the least confidence in their local school leaders.
"Clearly, there is greater unhappiness in Los Angeles than elsewhere in the state," Baldassare said, adding that there were also "greater challenges in Los Angeles than anywhere else, in terms of the size of the [Los Angeles Unified School] district and the makeup of the student body.""
... was to be grateful that our schools in Pleasanton are of so much higher quality than what poll participants in Los Angeles were reacting to. I suspect that if Pleasanton residents responded to a similar poll, the opinions expressed would be quite different.
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2009 at 7:20 am
Sandy: Imagine if we had had a chance to respond to a poll about what we value and might be willing to provide additional dollars to support. It's something the district decided against . . . why is that? Could it be because the last poll proved there was no support for a parcel tax . . . in a much better economy . . . and they already know there isn't sufficient support for it now in a much worse financial climate for the community as a whole?
I think we have to vote no for Measure G, remove the threat to CSR, force the district to make the other cuts suggested (look to other districts in the state that are making cuts and saving jobs through concessions), provide time for the community to assess the district's use of funds, determine what we want to keep and what might be less necessary, and what we are willing to fund if additional funds are needed . . . and perhaps at much less than $18 million.
Posted by Pete, a resident of the Bonde Ranch neighborhood, on May 1, 2009 at 8:15 am
Kathleen, I have been reading what you have written on many blogs about G and the PUSD and you seem very well informed which I am not but more so since reading the Pleasanton Weekly. Can you tell me what the polls say related to the passage of G and also why do seemingly do all of the ex principles go to the district office and why we need such a large and high priced group?
View in an RSS Reader
E-mail this topic.
Print this topic.
