Town Square

Post a New Topic

Arkin's early budget idea finally clarified

Original post made by Independent reader, Another Pleasanton neighborhood, on May 29, 2009

Interesting article in the Independent explaining the truth about trustee Arkin's budget ideas earlier this year. The last two paragraphs are quoted:

Web Link

"A caller to The Independent said that Reugsegger's characterization of budget talking points by trustee Valerie Arkin as being in correct. Arkin was quoted as having said the district would be able to save programs without a parcel tax. However, Reugsegger failed to say that saving programs would be tied to a $175 annual parcel tax.
Arkin told The Independent that her idea would not have required a parcel tax in the first year. However, one would have needed it in subsequent years."

Comments (3)

Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on May 29, 2009 at 8:55 am

And yet the district still feels that salary increases are a responsible expense.

Sorry, No on G.

Like this comment
Posted by NO ON G
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on May 29, 2009 at 9:44 am

Why did the Independent accept information from an anonymous caller when they could have easily called Arkin directly and Arkin could have explained that her budget suggestions would enable the district to NOT have a parcel tax for the next school year?

Arkin's proposal would have allowed the district the time to get its financial house in order, figure out what funds they could expect from the state and federal governments and develop a long term strategy for budget control in a bad economy. All this without putting a parcel tax on the ballot. This is exactly what many of those who are against this particular tax have said is necessary.

Arkin was the only Board Member who voted to first survey the community to see if there was support for the parcel tax. She did her homework and realized that if a previous survey showed a lack of support for a parcel tax by the community, putting a parcel tax to the voters in June might also not have support.

The other school board members need to stop patting Arkin on the head and dismissing her suggestions and start listening to her. She appears to have a good understanding of community opinions and concerns.

Like this comment
Posted by parent
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on May 29, 2009 at 9:57 am

Arkin's plan did not save everything but personally I don't think everything needed to be saved. If her plan went through and then there was a parcel tax for, lets say $175, and it listed the additional programs/items that could be saved, the public would have overwhelmingly said No to the parcel tax because the items that would be affected are not important enough in this community for an additional tax.

The administration and the rest of the board has shown complete contempt for the public by not going ahead to implement some of the changes that Arkin suggested and save money. She had a plan that saved quite a few things that could be done by a board vote and no additional funds. Then we could be discussing the remaining things that might be cut and the parcel tax, and the economic situation changing. Our district has shown that they are not willing to do anything now. The district not being honest with solutions is a big problem. How can you give more money to an entity that you do not trust?

I will be No on G until the district is honest and makes an effort to reduce spending in a non-sensational way.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

GE's re-organization reaches San Ramon digital headquarters
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 1,800 views

Sound and Fury over Vile and Slur-ry
By Tom Cushing | 60 comments | 975 views

New state housing requirements could affect Pleasanton
By Jeb Bing | 0 comments | 333 views