They have a headline called "BREAKING NEWS - Federal Stimulus to Avert Cuts" but fail to mention the additional $6.8 - $9 million in state cuts to Pleasanton Unified added to the original March $9.7 million in cuts. A $16.5 - $18.7 million deficit when compared to $8.1 million potential federal stimulus money is a really big number to kinda forget about.
From 1 week ago: Web Link
From 2 days ago: Web Link
Seems like a pretty big "BREAKING NEWS" stories to skip over. Perhaps they feel this isn't important.
I imagine it must be harder and harder to logically explain why Measure G is a bad idea when our district is faced with a remaining $8.4 - $10.6 million deficit this upcoming year even after the federal stimulus money is accounted for. Even by their own opposing text, step and column accounts for $1.5 million of the deficit this year. And they continue to claim that step and column accounts for a full $15 million in labor costs (so called "guaranteed raises") over the next four years even though the current contract expires at the end of the year. A poor assumption since the financial climate has changed dramatically since the last contract was adopted.
Where else shall cuts be made? What's next? My guess is the schools themselves. I believe that's where the math takes us. Soon.
I suspect the real "BREAKING NEWS story" doesn't appear on the pleasantonparceltaxinfo site because they have no idea what to do with this level of disaster. What can they say? "Measure G - It's Not Enough!" No. They have to cloud the issue saying that Measure G cannot guarantee Class Size Reduction. That there's not enough information yet to support a parcel tax. That this is not the right time for a parcel tax. That PUSD is poorly managed as they're obviously the only district in the state having a deficit problem. That PUSD has artificially created this situation to grab bailout money to continue to fund their private jets and lavish expense accounts. That we should seize this opportunity to break the Teachers Union. That we should vote NO on G because the miracle of educational funding reform in Sacramento should somehow be accomplished before considering a local parcel tax to save our local schools.
Vote No if you must. But please do so because you're making a choice to not help fund our school district that is in dire financial straights. Our district is in this condition because this is a period of unprecedented financial assault against public education in California.
This is also a time of great financial challenge for people and families. I can certainly understand and empathize with a No vote in that context. But please don't vote No, considering how much is at stake, having believed the misinformation given by the pleasantonparceltaxinfo rhetoric.