Welcome Tony.
Tony is the webmaster for SPS and PLEASANTON PTA COUNCIL.
Must admit, after the three page ad in the PW, the flyers distributed at schools and city sites, the campaign buttons, etc. am surprised anyone from SPS has decided to post on the blogs, particularly in light of Joan Laursen's comments at the recent PPIE luncheon.
But of course, we will respectfully discuss any facts SPS presents!

Tony,
Can you please comment on why freezing salary increases (S&C) for PUSD employees for the four years was not included in the ballot language? Additionally, can you please comment on why paying out these increases is ethically, socially, and fiscally responsible when tax payers are being told there is no money for our children's programs? Thank you.

S&C is in the contract. Teachers signed up for their job with the expectation that they'll get their S&C, regardless of the state of the economy. So deal with it. Pay up or lose those academic services.

do it now..., is one angry teacher. "so deal with it. Pay up...." Stay at home pay was in the UAW coontract, but it isn't there anymore. Anything can be renegotiated.

Measure G information is also at www.PleasantonParcelTaxInfo.com

Renegotiation should be done after the current contract expires. Just because some of you have to take a pay cut or got pink slips doesn't mean teachers have to suffer the same fate.

You people should be grateful that our teachers are willing to give up two non-teaching days to help with the budget. Alternatively, teachers can use those days for the much needed R&R.

do it now,
Now you're on this post yanking chains, my you are having a busy night, but you still need tact.

do it now -

So you support the AIG executives being paid out retention bonuses after the government infused the company with $40 billion of taxpayer money? I mean, after all, it was in their contracts.

Everyone take a deep breath.
I agree that the teachers will be needing some R & R, but in about 7 weeks, they will get the chance to do that!
I also agree that it is reasonable to broach the topic of opening negotiations with APT about salaries because there is concern about how PUSD will be able to pay out $15 million in S & C increases over the next four years ...and whether these additive salary increases are sustainable given the low reserves on hand.
In a budget crisis, it's necessary to look at all expenses and discuss them. This is something that is not only being done in private industry, (including those with unions) but government agencies as well.
The times, they are a-changing much as none of us want them to!

Didn't I just hear that BART workers (also unionized and under a contract) agreed to a pay freeze for the next several years?

Most everyone signs up for a job with an expectation of a certain salary. But more than just "some" have taken reductions. The sense of entitlement expressed by a few posters does nothing to help your arguments.

www.PleasantonParcelTaxInfo.com

The teachers that are secure in their jobs are willing to sacrifice the newer teachers.....so sad .....so greedy!

www.PleasantonParcelTaxInfo.com

Teachers have already agreed to a 2-day pay cut. What more do you people want from them? You people should be thankful that our teachers are such selfless and wonderful people.

If you have such hatred for our schools, our children, and our community, perhaps you should consider moving to one of the "red" states.

It's merely 64 cents a day to save our schools and our children.

Why wouldn't we?

Ignore those misleading opinions from the anti-G, anti-children, and anti-community crowd.

We need to stay focus on our commitment to save our schools, our children, and our community.

Our teachers and PUSD management are making personal sacrifice to help our children and our community via voluntary pay cut.

We, as a community, should be proud of this level of commitment toward education. Our children, our future leaders, depend on our commitment to pass this parcel tax.

Vote Yes on G!

Community of Character,

Seriously, stop it...HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I can't take your "pretend" support for this.

You are TOO funny mocking those Pro G people!!

HAHAHAHAHAHA! I can't stop laughing when I read your posts. Thanks for the good laugh!!! :)

To the No Character poster;
All of your points have already been addressed, you are the one spewing hate and not worth spending more time respon

Yes Practical parent, BART did suggest it...didnt agree to it yet, but what they did do was raise their rates for riders..Hmmmm, something to think about.

"www.PleasantonParcelTaxInfo.com

The teachers that are secure in their jobs are willing to sacrifice the newer teachers.....so sad .....so greedy!"

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about this website...posting incorrect information....so sad, so greedy....what $233 a year could do for this community. The no on Measure G people are willing to sacrifice programs and their schools by hiding behind propaganda....how sad.

Regarding the above post,

It's not just parents who think the teachers secure in their jobs are willing to sacrifice the newer teachers.

Many of the classified employees feel just as negatively about the Teachers Union. They realize that if the teachers' union would agree to a wage freeze, not only will the teachers' jobs be saved, so will the jobs of the classified employees. (and they know the teachers union couldn't care less about the classified employees' plight!)

The teachers' union demonstrates it has selective compassion.

The www.pleasantonpaceltaxinfo.com website provides facts - check out the SPS one and see how it doesn't.

Web Link

"When addressing the public, parcel tax backers are frequently encouraged to put the annual cost in simple, friendly sounding terms that usually begin with "it's only." "It's only a few cents a day," or "it's only a few dollars per month." Officials try to make it sound like the coming property tax increase is trivial and that anyone who is opposed must be a cheapskate."

Measure G is over $18M in four years. Step and column increases are over $15M in four years. These are not trivial numbers.

Parents for the Parcel,

Consider the student population of PUSD which is 14,864 in 2007-2008 per the Ed-Data website. That comes out to only $3 a day!

I think we can forgo the double lattes every day!

Community of Character -

I see no character qualities in your posts, perhaps your member name was literary irony?

I see others finally fed up with your bating tactics. Maybe you should pay closer attention to character traits worth having that you clearly do not display. Condescending comments and pure vitriol are traits we are not teaching our children in this community and they have no value in these important discussions.

You certainly cannot be serious: No one in this community hates children, hates schools, or hates our public employeess or this community. We are all strapped in these difficult times and are asking for some simple transparency and fiscal responsibility from those hired to properly manage the money we all contribute.

We could all use some character lessons it appears, including yourself.

I think this would be useful here...

"Community of Character -

You are right! We are on the brink of our children losing their education outright if this parcel tax does not pass!!

I'm SOOOOOOOOO scared for "the children"!! How soon can we vote to make sure this doesn't happen??? We should even consider building bunkers! Fear is always the emotion to base decisions on! Why didn't I see that??

Money is the answer! More, More, MORE! It doesn't matter that the district mismanages the money we give them and that ONLY 3.5 MM of the 18.5 MM that is generated by this tax will ACTUALLY go to the programs of the kids and then 15MM balance to the teacher's salaries. That is beside the point! Logic is over rated!! They DESERVE the money! And you are right to get us back on the right track!!

Who cares if they don't get it right this time and we'll need an additional tax to generate MORE revenues in the future?? The point is, we are selfish adults not in touch with reality like you are! You have won me over with your logic-lacking arguments and emotional manipulation about my own children and the poor helpless children of my neighbors like yours.

Thank you for setting me straight! I'm sure you are right and that this parcel tax will pass, because that would mean the majority of Pleasantonians are ignorant and emotionally led by the snout clowns. Thanks for letting us know what you think of the "majority" of your neighbors!

Actually, I believe, unlike yourself, that sound judgment and reasoning of this educated community will prevail and THAT, my friend, points to the fact that they will not be supporting this measure. Pleasantonians are just not that easily pressured or mislead."

Couldn't have said it better myself!

I posted this awhile back that you could take the AIG bailout money, divide it by all the tax payers in the US, spread the payback over four years and it would only be 74 cents a day . . . hardly makes anyone feel better about spending that $150 billion.

So let's be clear, this is over $18 million.

Kathleen,

I LOVE your logical approach! :)

You have a fan!

I wanted to address several posts I've noticed regarding yours truly :)

1) Yes, I am a member of the Committee to Save Pleasanton Schools and serve as web master of www.savepleasantonschools.org. I volunteered (all our members are volunteers) for this role as I could see the magnitude of the this financial crisis at state and local levels and felt compelled to try try to salvage some aspects of our school system that has made it so special. Not only for selfish reasons (yes, I'm a parent) but because I'm convinced that a great school system is a key-indicator of the total success of a community.

2) I am not the web master of the Pleasanton PTA web site - my only involvement to date with PTA is a typical "pay my membership at the start of the school year for what again?" kind of guy.

3) No, I'm not the kind of person who just "follows orders" from the CSPS - LOL - in terms of my informational posts. But, as I stated in my original post to this topic, it's not my intention to debate with the obvious core group of posters at PW's blog whose minds are already decided on Measure G and who have used this forum to voice their perspective for some time. I respect their opinions. Rather my and the rest of the Committee's hope is to present relevant information to our citizens so they may make an informed decision on Measure G.


Have a good evening

Tony

Tony,

It's good to have you here.

Tony, in the interest of full disclosure, are you married to a teacher in the PUSD?

Tony, welcome to the fray. I hope you can keep your head above the unpleasanton tone of some of the debaters here, and stay focused on your intention.... "to present relevant information to our citizens so they may make an informed decision on Measure G."

I agree that the Save Pleasanton Schools Web Link presents useful information that voters can assess when making their personal decisions about measure G.

I keep coming back to the arguments made in favor of the measure:

"Measure G will:

* Keep class sizes small in the critical early years and in ninth grade English and math classes;

* Provide effective reading and math support programs;

* Ensure our libraries continue to support student achievement;

* Keep counselors in our schools to support students;

* Maintain the effective technology instruction our students need to compete in a global economy;

* Retain our highly valued elementary music programs;

* Keep our schools clean and safe."

I know that the concerns about the school district's past spending need to be addressed, but I believe that can be done at the same time as we preserve the key elements of PUSD's educational quality described above.

Sandy: What is ignored in yours and Tony's posts is that we don't get to choose what we are willing to support with our money; there's no guarantee the money will be spent as you indicate (despite a nice list to go with the ballot language); the relief this tax would give to the general fund can be squandered because that behavior, already evident, has no reason to change; and, most importantly, ignores the steps that can be taken to maintain program through other suggested cuts without a parcel tax.

I've already said this to Russell on another thread.

When you don't need a reason, any reason will do. Despite the facts showing this tax isn't needed at this time, that the community deserves an opportunity to determine what it values and will pay for, and that the district has managed currents funds extremely poorly, some still believe, with the district's threat to CSR, that voting against the tax will hurt kids.

To paraphrase the president from last night: the recklessness of a few jeopardizes us all.

What some (or most) people may not know is that ALL medical/dental/vision benefits also come out of teacher's salaries. Health insurance costs continue to rise, so while so many people are complaining that teachers make too much money or should not be entitled to raises think about this---the cost for a family for health insurance starting July 1st will now be $1,800.58 (Health Net) or $1,417.53 (Kaiser) add to that another $167.41 for dental and another $23.91 for vision plus insurance costs. So while teachers receive a raise in salaries, health benefits continue to rise too so it's really a wash and often times a pay decrease!!! Add to that the selfless way they agreed to 2 days no pay and we are very much in the red!!!!

Wife of a teacher: People reading these blogs know about teachers paying health benefits. They will also know that the $10,000 cost was rolled onto the salary schedule as a way to boost salary as a consideration when their retirement allotment is calculated (higher pay equals higher retirement pay out). They will also know that the $10,000, added about ten years ago, has grown in value with every COLA given over that period. Just the COLAs in 2005-2008 make that $10,000 worth nearly $12,000 today—I can’t get to data on COLAs given prior to 2005. It is also my understanding that these benefits are deducted over ten months rather than twelve (heard this from teachers), but I can’t confirm that being true for all. (I mention this possibility to clarify that it’s then $18,000 annually not $22,000 and $14,000 not $17,000.)

There also have been questions raised: (1) who is negotiating (poorly) on the cost of those benefits, (2) what kind of plans are being purchased, and (3) why aren’t alternate plans being explored/offered? Either better negotiators (they exist) are needed or very pricey plans are being purchased or additional plans should be made available to suit the needs of myriad employees or some combination of all three.

The two days are only to be given if the parcel tax is passed. Other districts already have given more and without strings attached to save the jobs of fellow employees.

I must be reading that wrong.

$1,800.58 (Health Net) for a family? That's $21,600.00 per year?

I wonder if teachers would be satisfied if we reduced their gross salaries and offered benefits like they used to have prior to electing to put benefits "on the schedule". Since 67% of certificate staff at PUSD do not have to purchase their own benefits, I think it would be difficult to go back to the way it was.

Russell: We think it is $18,000 a year (not any better really) because the deductions are taken out only ten months of the year, not twelve. If it is $21,600 . . . it's an even worse deal. I wonder if there is no incentive for the district to negotiate better deals on benefits because it technically doesn't cost them anything.

Stacey, you're right, because those who don't take benefits can opt to roll that into a 403b (government version of 401k--pretax dollars) or add it to their take home pay (taxable).

The ballot language does constrain how the money can be used. Measure G revenue will not go directly into the General Fund. The oversight committee that will review the spending will be looking for any inappropriate use of the measure G funds.

I have volunteered to serve on that oversight committee, and you can count on me to speak out publicly if I see any evidence that funds are being used for purposes not mentioned in the ballot language.

The oversight committee would have about as much power as the Budget Advisory Committee, who were asked just to prioritize cuts, had in this whole process.

The oversight committee has no real power for punishing the district for spending problems. All it can do is say "Please, don't do that".

The ballot language doesn't constrain anything (except in the case of administrator salaries). It only said "We may spend this money on this." Real constraint would be if the language said, "Money may ONLY be spent on...."

Even if all the parcel tax funds were used on the programs listed in Measure G, it doesn't preclude monies from the General Fund to be spent upon increasing raises or make accommodations for re-inserting the Measure G programs into the General Fund after the parcel tax expiration date. That's how the shell game is played.

"Measure G will not go directly into the General Fund." Want to play a little game of hide the pea?

Let's hope the oversight committee does a better job than the one for Measure B.

Sandy you have not proven yourself to be an unbiased independent thinker. So far it seems we can count on you to speak out with the district party line.