REPULSED by the Measure E Wording on the Ballot Schools & Kids, posted by Dana, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Apr 23, 2011 at 8:05 pm
It is NO WONDER that BIG GOVERNMENT and BIG PUBLIC SCHOOLS win a larger and larger proportion of our tax dollars.
With ultra-biased wording on ballot measures like the Measure E ballot, it is very likely to persuade the uninformed to vote 'yes.'
The very biased wording states...
"To protect local schools from State budget cuts, provide local funding that cannot be taken away by the State, and proserv quality eucation by:
- emphasizing core adacemic instruction in math, science and reading,
- attracting and retaining highly-qualified teachers,
- supporting specialized science and reading instruction,
- supporting school libraries, and
- minimizing class sice increases,
shall Pleasanton Unified school District levy '$98 per parcel annually for fourn years, with a senior exemption, independent oversidht and no money for administrators' salaries?"
Apparently whomever wrote this is extremely in favor of this measure passing.
Had the author been against the measure ... like I am... the disadvantages of pouring more and more money into what I perceive as a broken system could have been highlighted.
Public school systems are insatiable sponges for your tax dollars. There is NEVER enough and there false reasoning is that it is ALWAYS for the benefit of the kids!!!" THAT IS A COMPLETE CROCK OF BULL.
Do NOT be fooled by this biased wording on Measure E.
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Apr 23, 2011 at 10:17 pm
"Apparently whomever wrote this is extremely in favor of this measure passing"
Apparently you don't vote often or, if you do, you don't bother to read the Measures or Propositions on the ballot. The text of any Measure or Proposition is ALWAYS written in a way that supports the proposition for the simple reason that this text is usually written by those who placed the Measure or Proposition on the ballot. Is this news to you?
Posted by Dana, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Apr 23, 2011 at 10:53 pm
You're right. I am not familiar with the laws in this Soviet State of California. I moved here from a State that values free enterprise and limited government. However you are probably not familiar with those concepts. The Measure E ballot is inaccurately written and grossly misleading.
Posted by Gill, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 24, 2011 at 12:14 am
"what I perceive as a broken system could have been highlighted."
PUSD is one of the best school districts in California and its schools are better than a lot of private schools. API, SAT, and AP scores are excellent, and college placement rates are high. It is not a broken system. Do you have any children in our schools?
Posted by Excuse Me, a resident of the Avila neighborhood, on Apr 24, 2011 at 10:57 am
The small group of folks against Measure E have realized their futile position and the eventual outcome of the ballot measure. It is therefore not their "no tax" position that has lost, but rather the misleading wording of the ballot measure that caused their position to lose so badly.
I have an eight year that makes excuses just like the No on E people.
Posted by Really?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 24, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Looks like Dana's real concerns are spelled out clearly here:Web Link
"Since one of the goals of White America is to encourage pro-white activism..." oh just read on to see more of what Dana really values. And this is now taking place in N.C where they are currently working to abolish integration of the schools:
and in Texas and Tenn. they are trying to rewrite the history books "According to Tea Party Spokesman Hal Rounds, “there’s an awful lot of made up criticism about the founders intruding on the Indians or having slaves or being hypocrites in one way or another.”
Posted by Really?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 24, 2011 at 8:56 pm
I believe this is why they really want to do away with unions- so they can have control over what is taught in schools and push their political agenda on everyone's children. Why do you think Tea Party governors are abolishing teacher's rights as we speak?
And yet, the blanket statement- it's all the union's fault prevails across party lines- please- its time to see the big picture about what is being played out as planned in politics and big business. The tea party is printing it, shouting it, and following through with their agendas as everyone just sits back and watches!
Posted by latebird, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Apr 24, 2011 at 11:45 pm
Here again the idiocy crowd crows about its own idiocy. Dana calls Howard Zinn a communist because Zinn self-identifies as a democratic socialist. Dana is too ignorant to recognize the differences between a communist and a democratic socialist. It's a shame that Dana couldn't have had an education like the kids in the PUSD are receiving.
Posted by Wow Dana!, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 7:30 am
"I refuse to place any of my children in any public school...especially in the Socialist State of California.
Here in the PISD...(Pleasanton Indoctrination School District), did you know that they use a history text authored by Howard Zinn, who is a self-described "Democratic Socialist (i.e. a Communist) !? "
Wow Dana! I hope you are never in a position to do much about education! Your thinking is pretty scary!
Indoctrination, btw, is what is being done in many of the private christian schools. Christian schools even require bible studies as a requirement to get a high school diploma - yikes! Oh yeah, and then there are the infamous retreats where no chaperones are allowed, just one teacher with 12 vulnerable youngsters. And if a parent complains because of safety concerns, the kid gets expelled! Makes you wonder...
Public education is much better, especially in PUSD, than any private school, especially the christian ones.
While I agree that unions need reform, I also see that the way the GOP is going about it is too extreme.
Posted by earlybird, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 8:33 am
unclehomerr is wrong again. Too much Beck perhaps? Inadequate education? Probably both. Hitler was a National Socialist, not a Democratic Socialist. The difference is night and day. Comments like homerr's -- consistently, on this thread and others -- makes me grateful my kids are enrolled in PUSD schools. To think they could end up as ignorant and hateful as unclehomerr is a real nightmare. Let's keep PUSD schools strong and protect our kids from the kinds of ignorance displayed by the yokel homerr.
Posted by Go Dana, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:05 am
I'm thankful for Dana, who is willing to put herself out there and state some facts. I love the "PISD" usage, and only regret not thinking it up myself. After putting three kids through out PISD, they, themselves, and many of their classmates, complained annually about their teachers spewing dislike and discontent for America and how other countries had it better. These students were smacked down whenever they offered an opposing voice.
How's that for education. Indoctrination is definitely more accurate. Fortnately, my children learned to consider views from all perspectives and are flourishing - and broadened - adults, IN SPITE of the indoctrination.
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:22 am
"After putting three kids through out PISD, they, themselves, and many of their classmates, complained annually about their teachers spewing dislike and discontent for America and how other countries had it better. "
If you and Dana don't like Pleasanton's schools, why are you here? If I felt that the local schools were "indoctrinating" my children, I certainly wouldn't stick around while not one, but three of my children were going through the same school system. Doesn't seem to put you in a very good light as a parent.
Posted by Gill, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:36 am
This really boils down to teaching evolution in the schools. That and the theory of relativity. Evolution says that man came from monkeys, so man is just an animal. Relativity says that everything is relative so you can just do whatever you want. If you think it is OK to rob a bank, just go rob it everything is relative. That is what they teach at PISD. It is disgusting.
Posted by earlybird, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:39 am
Dana and Go Dana both testify to the truism: bad education produces bad parenting skills. This places even more responsibility on our excellent school system, which we can only hope will counterbalance Dana's and Go Dana's kids' unfortunate home life with some strong learning. Without a strong educational system such as PUSD's, Dana's and Go Dana's kids end up parked in front of Fox News before turning to Jerry Springer. Then Dana and Go Dana complain about how their kids aren't being properly educated. Faced with this kind of ignorance, we've still got a long way to go, folks! Because our family supports strong schools as best antidote for ignorance, we voted YES on E.
Posted by earlybird, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:47 am
Add Gill to the list of ignoramuses which includes Dana and Go Dana. Gill's expressed ignorance regarding theory of evolution and theories of relativity is stunning. It raises the question how in the year 2011 someone in the United States could be so unmitigatedly uneducated. This is why my family supports our public school system.
Posted by the choice is yours!, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:55 am
Your decision to vote for Yes or No boils down to this: Do you want your children to grow up in the mold of Dana, Go Dana, and Gill (I do sincerely hope they are all the same person)? If so, vote No, as your vote not only will demonstrate your alliance with Dana et.al., but will promote a weakening of PUSD which will raise the likelihood of other Danas and Gills oozing their way out from under god knows what rock they live under. If you desire a strong educational system that encourages informed moral reflectiveness and rational thought, vote YES on E.
Posted by Go Dana, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 10:04 am
I, too, was indoctrinated to believe that the schools were 'perfection'. Faultless to a fault. Excellent. Supreme. It took the students speaking up to find out that there were, in fact, some major flaws. Firing incompetent teachers is one. Teaching from a single viewpoint is another. Serving agendas. Nonsense. I was wearing rose colored glasses until then. I stayed very active in the schools, too. Trying to be an instrument rather than a squeaky wheel. Supporting teachers, first.
Then I took off those glasses and got down to business. While the schools ARE very good, and getting better, I recommend that all parents take an active role in the teaching of our kids.
And that includes the horrendous politicing(sp) of our children through taxation that is without transparency, etc. etc.
Posted by Really?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 11:27 am
If the tea party- Dana and Go Dana had their way, we would be teaching that explorers had no part in decimating the native population, slavery wasn't a bad thing, that evolution is not real, and the list goes on. Its the new nationalist superiority viewpoint that they are going for- at the cost of the truth!
So Danas - what is wrong with the truth- do you not trust your own children to hear this information and think for themselves? I felt very lied to about the missions when I found out what they really did to the California natives. Ignoring these bouts of repression in our history seems to me like you agree with this treatment of others. It also seems coincidental that it is surfacing in a frenzy as we have an African American president leading us.
Is this who we want guiding our public schools? This type of mentality? We have parents questioning books- demanding they be removed from libraries in this district!
THis is a rising problem that needs to be addressed regardless of a parcel tax!
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 12:09 pm
"Go Dana" said "I, too, was indoctrinated to believe that the schools were 'perfection'. Faultless to a fault. Excellent. Supreme."
So you thought that schools were "perfection", did you? So you think that everyone who votes "Yes" on Measure E thinks that the schools are "perfect" and all teachers are "perfect", do you? In other words, you assume that everyone is as simple-minded as you were and still are.
Posted by Wow Gill!, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 12:33 pm
"This really boils down to teaching evolution in the schools. That and the theory of relativity. Evolution says that man came from monkeys, so man is just an animal. "
omg, this is too much! So you think evolution is not real? I suppose you believe in creation instead, where the world magically got created in 7 days?
I grew up in a religious household but luckily my parents were not ignorant like you seem to be. They embraced religion but did not fight scientific facts or ignored common sense.
I suppose you do not believe in global warming either. And I suppose you think Palin is qualified for president - yikes, yikes, yikes!
Your kids more than anybody else's kids need the public school system, so they can be taught common sense and theories based on scientific facts! Yours and Dana's kids are the ones who would benefit the most from a good public education like PUSD's.
Vote YES on E to keep quality public schools; that is a way to keep people like Gill and Dana, and the entire new extreme right movement, from doing too much damage.
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Gill said: "This really boils down to teaching evolution in the schools. That and the theory of relativity. Evolution says that man came from monkeys, so man is just an animal. Relativity says that everything is relative so you can just do whatever you want. If you think it is OK to rob a bank, just go rob it everything is relative. That is what they teach at PISD. It is disgusting."
Posted by earlybird, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 4:19 pm
After I lumped Gill in with the Danas, it occurred to me that Gill might have been being sarcastic.
I'm willing to assume he was. But what does that tell us? Gill's sarcastic remark about monkeys and relativism was so similar to the Danas' remarks, that it was virtually impossible to distinguish one from the other. That is, given a context where the Danas are blathering their uneducated biases, an attempt at extreme sarcasm gets interpreted as being consistent with the Danas. Where does that place the Danas? About three planets beyond Pluto!
Posted by Brian, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 5:11 pm
These posts help to clarify who the No on E people are:
1. They don't have any kids in PUSD, don't care about their kid's education or think that the schools will be just fine without this funding.
2. They either don't own property in PUSD, don't care about their property value or don't think their property value will be affected by a decline in school quality
3. They want to send a message to the school board at any cost, including the cost to our kids education and everyone's property value.
The message they are trying to send to the school board is "stop giving teachers pay raises and big pensions". Then you won't need that money that the state cut from your funding.
However, the fact of the matter is that the teachers are under contract and will get their pay raise and pension regardless of if measure E passes or not. If the measure does not pass, programs will need to be cut, class sizes will need to be increased and school days will need to be reduced. Undoubtedly, school quality will decline.
I can understand why the people who don't have kids in PUSD and don't own residential property in Pleasanton would against this this measure. They have no vested interest and it would only be more money out their pocket.
I can only speculate why the people who do own residential property would be against this measure. They either don't intend to sell their house any time soon, are in complete denial about the link between school quality and house values, are in denial about the link between reduced funding and reduced school quality and/or want to send a message at any cost.
Posted by jill, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 6:10 pm
The teachers are under contract and it is a shame that they would have programs cut and new teachers fired so that they can continue to receive their raises. It is not the public's fault for not allowing the public to be extorted into paying for the raises; it is the fault of the union. The union is making the decision to what they feel they are entitled to and do not really care about education.
I own a home, have kids in the district, and I want to send a message to the district and the unions that raises must stop if they want more money from me.
Posted by mark, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Like Jill, I'm willing to sacrifice my kids' education and your kids' education to send a message. What's the message? I think my kids' teachers should suffer just like I have during this recession. I know teachers took a hit in the recent past -- nobody wants to be furloughed -- but I'll not be satisfied until I see them groaning in the streets. See, it's all about principle. We see them groaning in the street, and we can claim a tea party victory. More kids in the classrooms? All for the better. Where in the Constitution does it say anything about our kids having the right to a superior education? Let's do away with elitist assumptions about education; your kids will be just as fulfilled being repairers of lawn sprinklers than as historians or chemists. It's the principle of the matter: vote No against our teachers; make them suffer for choosing their elitist occupation.
Posted by Arnold, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:33 pm
Increasing the structural deficit will only lead to increased wages and decreased educational services/results. I know it sounds counterintuitive but it is true. Increasing costs will only lead to decreased services, cut programs, or more parcel taxes (larger parcel taxes). Pension costs are set to increase by 80% when the increases are approved, stimulus funds are set to expire, and compensation is scheduled to increase even though the district can't afford it.
I'm not sure how you use funds from a four year parcel tax to increase compensation that is ongoing and expect anything other than a structural deficit. When you add the 15% of payroll to the mix that is the soon to be the increased cost to fund the unfunded pension liability (and that is stretching the taxpayer payment over thirty years - otherwise it would be much higher)then I think there is a problem just a year or two down the road.
You may trust the teachers union to do the right thing but I do NOT! I'm voicing my opinion in the hopes that conservative financing/funding rules the day. It sounds like your opinion is let's provide the raises, ignore the state budget, ignore the pension problem, ignore the fact the school district is asking for money to cover raises they can't afford, and hope for the best.
If the teachers union gets their way I can only say - I hope for the best but expect the same results that our state & city budgets are experiencing. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think you can make your math work. I guess it's really just a calculated gamble that pitts the unions wants against school childrens educational needs.
Posted by mark, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 25, 2011 at 11:10 pm
Arnold, for the eleventeenth time, trots out the same old tired claims, oblivious to how most of us respect our teachers, want them to be well paid, do not desire to punish their union, and, above all, do not want to sacrifice our children's education for the sake of a thoroughly refuted, outdated economic ideology. I'd love to see Arnold squirm while he reads about the Michelle Rhee fiasco; what kind of cognitive dissonance there must be to embrace such an obviously failed policy for the sake of preserving one's own ideological beliefs. Pretty sad really.
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Apr 26, 2011 at 7:31 am
Arnold, the nationally recognized attractiveness of Pleasanton in national ranking like this (Web Link) is one big reason that so many of us are supporting our schools by voting YES on E. Note that the quality of our schools is highlighted in the very first paragraph of the linked announcement about why Pleasanton is one of the best places to live in America.
Primarily because of it's schools, Pleasanton is not an inexpensive community to buy into. There are many less expensive nearby cities and communities where one can buy a house for much less. But so many of us decided to pay a premium and buy into Pleasanton because school quality is such an important factor in our decision on where to buy. So it's not surprising that so many of us here in Pleasanton so strongly support our schools and are voting YES on E.
Your railings against teacher's unions and your failure to acknowledge the simple fact that Pleasanton had one of the best public school systems in the area makes me wonder how you ever ended up in Pleasanton. If you don't support the schools here, why did you pay a premium price to buy a house in Pleasanton in the first place? Go get a house in Hayward. You can continue your ranting against teacher's unions there and you'll probably find that your neighbors are much more sympathetic to your views since they don't have a nationally recognized school system that they're trying to protect. I think that you'll be much happier there.
Posted by Gill, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 26, 2011 at 7:56 am
What on earth are you talking about? Measure E can't increase "the structural deficit". It doesn't call for new spending. It raises money. Do you have any idea what you're talking about? You make no sense at all.
Posted by common decency, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 26, 2011 at 9:16 am
For the likes of Arnold and his followers, it isn't a matter of being right or wrong. What only 'matters' is the use and abuse of numbers in the advancement of a mean-spirited bias, with hopes of the numbers charade attracting other mean-spirited types. Unfortunately, it blinds them to the excellence of PUSD's schools, so busy are they lashing out and spinning doomsday scenarios. I'm relieved that the many neighbors I've talked to have all voted Yes on E.
Posted by common decency, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Apr 26, 2011 at 11:59 am
I described a mean-spirited bias which I have found to drive Arnold's wrong-headed, use/abuse of numbers. Those who are coming from 'the financial side' can not be easily distinguished from the other crappola dished out by the right-wing hate crowd. If what I said is enough to offend one's sensibilities, then I wonder what something genuinely offensive might do to those same sensibilities. (See, for example, recent post on right-wing attempts to slander respected judge who ruled recently on Prop 8.)
Posted by Observer of Lumpiness, a resident of the Del Prado neighborhood, on Apr 26, 2011 at 5:05 pm
I for one, without being easily LUMPED into any extreme group, feel that the district must cut its own costs. This is NOT about the Teacher's pay, as the union has control over that. It is about fiscal responsibility, which we are having to exercise in our own lives, and we can only wish for in private and public organizations.