Town Square

Vote No on Parcel tax - support fiscal responsibility and integrity

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


This story contains 291 words.

If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.

If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.


Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 2, 2009 at 12:38 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

The pro-Measure G position is essentially anti-taxpayer, anti-property owner, anti-fiscal responsibility.

Casey should show the community that he is worth the perks given to him in his contract by pursuing all means available to him to balance the budget without a parcel tax. His obligation is to the taxpayers, not the employee units.

Like this comment
Posted by Sensibly Save Our Schools
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Apr 2, 2009 at 1:21 pm

Sensibly Save Our Schools is a registered user.

Agreed! Dr. Casey should remember that his obligation is to the taxpayers.
But I will add that the School Board members also need to remember that their obligation is also to the taxpayers.
They are supposed to be acting on our behalf, not in concert with PUSD.

Like this comment
Posted by Jeb Bing
editor of the Pleasanton Weekly
on Apr 3, 2009 at 7:49 am

Jeb Bing is a registered user.

Just a reminder that we are restricting all posts related to the June 2 parcel tax measure to registered users of the Pleasanton Weekly Town Square forum. We have found that this keeps the conversations more civil and focused without any restriction on what posters say or the opinions they express.