Town Square

Post a New Topic

I see many yes on G signs on lawns.

Original post made by Wondering, Parkside, on May 28, 2009

I have noticed a lot of Yes on G signs on people's lawns. I have not seen one No on G sign yet, although there might be a few. After reading all the posts and articles on G I'd say the town is split on the issue (no duh, huh?). So why no 'NO on G' signs? Is it that nobody is making them? Is it that it is politically incorrect to put one on your lawn? Is it that people fear retribution or scorn? People seemed fearless with their Prop 8 signs on both sides, and I think both sides were as, or more, disgusted by each other. Will we find out that No on G were the sign silent majority? I know it's a 2/3 vote so it won't take more than say 10,000 no votes. Anyway people are blissful in their anonymity here and the No on G people are extending it to their lawns.

Comments (29)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on May 28, 2009 at 1:10 pm

I have choosen not to put a No on G sign in my yard because I live in a neighborhood with many teachers. I value their friendships and don't wish to create any riffs in those friendships because of my views on the topic. If they ask me, I will be honest in my reply, but I feel no need to put it in the "open".

Additionally my children attend school and I do not want to risk any "outing" of them in any way. Yes, I understand most teachers wouldn't act any differently to them, but the small risk that one might is enough to keep me from displaying my opposition to G in the form of a sign on my lawn.

Given how politically active Pleasanton is, during any given election you can find several "Pro" signs on large numbers of neighborhood lawns, and seeing how few their are in relation to measure G, I think that speaks volumes to what to expect from Measure G's chance of passing.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ann Martin
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on May 28, 2009 at 1:11 pm

Wondering,
I can't speak for every person who does not support Measure G, but I have been public in my opposition to Measure G, and because I am not personally swayed to vote one way or the other based on signs and ads, I don't think my spending money for a sign is going to influence anyone or anything except my checking account balance.

Also, I admit it, I'm cheap. If someone wants to give me a nice professionally made sign for my lawn that says NO ON G, I'll take it and put it up. I'm not worried about political correctness or incorrectness or retribution. I have friends on both sides of this issue and while I disagree with those who are for the parcel tax, I recognize that we all share the same goal - a desire for our children to receive a quality education. It is possible to disagree on this issue, but still like and respect those with whom I disagree.

The community will make its decision on the parcel tax, and I'll keep plunking away at the budget looking for ways to cut expenses that don't have anything to do with educating our children. While I believe it's always a good thing to monitor expenses, in this economy, it's more important than ever to be sure that every budget dollar supports our students. (I did warn you that I am cheap)

As for the yes on g lawn signs, there's another way to look at them and that is to count the yards that don't have signs! :)

Now I know that by posting something on the blogs, I've opened the door to all those who want to respond to my comments and I ask that you not take offense if I don't respond back until tomorrow. However, I have about a huge pile of senior grad night forms to cross reference against an excel spread sheet, want to put in an hour on the treadmill and I'm planning on attending the Amador Drama Awards event tonight so I will not be able to reply until tomorrow.

Thanks for understanding.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Wondering
a resident of Parkside
on May 28, 2009 at 1:13 pm

That's one for fear of scorn / retribution. Understandable.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Wondering
a resident of Parkside
on May 28, 2009 at 1:17 pm

One for fear of scorn / retribution. Understandable.
One for cheapness / belief it does no good. Understandable.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Billie
a resident of Mohr Park
on May 28, 2009 at 1:33 pm

If I were wondering about the proliferation of pro-Prop G signage, I might be more inclined to wonder about the cost of the pro-G lawn signs, as well as the cost of the special election, the campaign, the website, the spiffy mailers that have been sent out weekly, and the advertising in the local papers.

I might wonder why the pro-G folks collecting all that money to "save Pleasanton schools" haven't made arrangements to donate it to the school district instead. Because, really, whether or not Prop G passes, wouldn't the schools benefit more than the dump when the voting is done and all that campaign litter is thrown away?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sandy
a resident of Mohr Park
on May 28, 2009 at 2:09 pm

The costs of holding the election and the costs of the YES on G campaign are completely separate, as required by law.

The pro-G campaign has collected private donations of (as reported on the Save Pleasanton Schools website) $60,000. It pays for ads, yard signs, mailers, and phone bills for the phone banking. I believe the website has been donated -- could be wrong, though. Oh, and water for the folks who walked precincts to talk to their neighbors about the measure. And a few snacks.

My yard sign was not free -- because I donated to the campaign. I am fortunate to be able to do so, as well as donating to the PTA at Alisal, and to my daughter's classroom. Others who cannot afford to donate can still get a yard sign if they want one. It will say YES on G, though -- none of our donors wanted to pay to make NO signs.

$60,000 spent on the campaign will result in $4.58 million dollars coming into the school district each year over the next 4 years, if the measure passes. My direct donation to the school is more than what I donated to the YES campaign, but it does not have anywhere near the same multiplier effect.

I donate time and money to the schools directly. I chose to donate to the campaign as well, because I thought it would improve our community to do so.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Billie
a resident of Mohr Park
on May 28, 2009 at 2:51 pm

Since PUSD is pro-G, and the special election is costing the district at least $300,000, I think it's more than fair to include election costs with the cost of the pro-G gampaign.

Sandy, you forgot to mention the amount of time and effort you donate to the cause on this forum!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Parent of Two
a resident of Val Vista
on May 28, 2009 at 4:02 pm

Parent of Two is a registered user.

Count me in the "What's the point?" column of sign-posting. And it's not just about Measure G. I've never had any political signage on my lawn, on my car, on a t-shirt, or anywhere on my person.

Why bother? Is someone going to change his/her vote because "that guy has a sign/bumpersticker"? Is anything POSITIVE going to come from it, or will it start arguments where none existed?

p.s. I also happen to live a couple of houses away from a PUSD administrator with his Yes-on-G sign. He has no idea which way I'm voting, and there's no reason to tell him. Isn't that the purpose of a secret ballot?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by my sister
a resident of Canyon Creek
on May 28, 2009 at 4:25 pm

My sister got a Yes on G sign for free since she's a teaher. She made it sound like it was a "Here you go, make sure you put it up." Like it was with Prop 8 at the Mormon church.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Maria
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 28, 2009 at 4:34 pm

The SPS people assume that anyone who works for the school district is for the parcel tax, but I know many who are not, especially classified employees.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by parent
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on May 28, 2009 at 5:38 pm

The parcel tax committee knew there would be no organized fundraisers against them and no opposition campaign that takes money. It is amazing they are wasting $60,000 to $80,000 on a campaign with no opposition that is spending any money. The district also spent a lot more of our tax money to have a special election by itself instead of at the May election. I would add that additional cost of the special election to the cost for the parcel tax campaign. All of this money could go to great use in the schools. Even one of our school board members talks about the great donations that San Ramon gets for its schools. We should be looking for donations to the schools instead of donations for printing, mailing, signs, and hugely expensive ads in the paper.

I feel sorry for the boosters clubs and PTAs if the parcel tax does pass. I would imagine donations to their organizations will go down significantly because people will feel their parcel tax amount will be their donation for the year. Then the parent organizations will be less able to fund the exact programs they want to fund and will rely on the district's bureaucracy. This parcel tax will be paying for raises instead of going to our great programs; including music and sports.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by unclehomerr..
a resident of Downtown
on May 28, 2009 at 6:32 pm


Didn't we settle this a couple of weeks ago??

The Yes On G folks put up signs.. the No On G folks don't!

All the yards without signs are No On G voters!

unclehomerr..


 +   Like this comment
Posted by No on G
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 28, 2009 at 8:39 pm

And goes for cars, too! :)

Nicely done, Unclehomerr!

LOL!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 28, 2009 at 8:43 pm

I think posting the signs is not so much to sway votes but more as a sign of solidarity.

@ Maria
The SPS people assume that anyone who works for the school district is for the parcel tax, but I know many who are not, especially classified employees.

Likewise, it's not just teachers who DO support Measure G.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 28, 2009 at 8:44 pm

... and it's to raise awareness


 +   Like this comment
Posted by No on G
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 28, 2009 at 8:47 pm

resident

I think the mass mailings raise enough awarness. I get to see them twice, once when I check the mail, the other when I clean my cat's litter box!

Kitty is pro-G!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Big Poppa
a resident of Del Prado
on May 29, 2009 at 5:49 am

I have seen exactly 4 signs in my neighborhood. The reason the school district is having the stand alone vote is that they are hoping for a low turnout of mostly for G voters while the no on G voters are hard at work trying to pay for all of the additional taxes and fees put upon us/them. For those who believe that additional taxes are the answer the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy are real. What a bunch of dopes.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by KGM
a resident of Valley Trails
on May 29, 2009 at 8:46 am

Just for the record, we are voting yes on Measure G - and we don't have a yard sign.

And the comments about working hard, the Easter Bunny, and "bunch of dopes"... please.

Sad to see that after all these months, the discourse on the no side has yet to be elevated.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by pot calling the kettle
a resident of Grey Eagle Estates
on May 29, 2009 at 9:22 am

KGM- Some on both sides have been a-holes. Trying to say that all the no G'ers have 'yet to be elevated' is insulting too. They are the ones putting up the numbers and doing the research, mostly. Both sides have those that are name calling.
Yes on G- 'you don't care about kids, mean spirited people like you,' the list goes on
No on G- 'living in a fantasy world, ignorant' and so on.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by KGM
a resident of Valley Trails
on May 29, 2009 at 9:31 am

Pot/Kettle,

I think if you read the negative (and I don't mean "no on g," but negative tone) comments on this page, you will see that my observation has merit.

And numbers and research have been put up by both sides. I spent a great deal of time trying to counter incorrect and unfairly presented information that was posted by the "no" side, until I realized that it was a never-ending project and decided to focus my efforts elsewhere.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by pot calling the kettle
a resident of Grey Eagle Estates
on May 29, 2009 at 10:38 am

It's not about this page or that page. READ ALL POSTS (if anyone has that kind of time) and you will see negativity on both sides, unless you are too biased and think, "Yeah like guy does hate kids." or "Yeah that person is greedy" or "That person is living in a fantasy world." You have to be blind on either side not to see it.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by KGM
a resident of Valley Trails
on May 29, 2009 at 10:49 am

P/K,

My comment actually was about this page.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ann
a resident of Birdland
on May 29, 2009 at 4:53 pm


Everyone I know is "yes on G" and no one has a sign...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rosemarie
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 29, 2009 at 5:09 pm

100% support on our street (with 25% being empty nesters) and no one has a lawn sign...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rex
a resident of Birdland
on May 29, 2009 at 5:25 pm

Ann, I told you "yes" but am actually voting "no". Sorry.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Maria
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 29, 2009 at 5:46 pm

resident,
Not every teacher supports Measure G either. They are just smart enough to not say so publicly.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Dan
a resident of Birdland
on May 29, 2009 at 6:12 pm

Everyone I know is "no on G" and no one has a sign...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by birds
a resident of Birdland
on May 31, 2009 at 9:04 pm

I guess what we can surmise from the previous posts is that birds of a feather stick together! ;)


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Observer
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 31, 2009 at 9:38 pm

I see many "Yes on G" placed illegally on city owned property!

To the extent that the placement of these signs break the law, the "Yes on G" folks should be fined to the fullest extent of the law!

This demonstrates that the "Yes on G" folk's behavior is contrary to the concept of "Community of Character"...


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

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Not Endorsements
By Roz Rogoff | 9 comments | 1,258 views

A second half of life exceptionally well lived
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 679 views