Let’s follow the money. Yes, almost all facilities need repairs and upgrades, well before funding new buildings, but has PUSD used the funds from Measure I1 appropriately thus far? Maybe, maybe not, but the new elementary school on its list has not come to be and yet new science buildings have been constructed at three schools. I know the district needs to be financially prudent, as well as forward-looking, but it sure seems many decisions are being initiated from the financial officers and not teaching and learning.

This is directed to Pleasanton voters who may be concerned about the "appropriate" use of funds from the general obligation bond, Measure I1, passed by voters in 2016. State law requires a Citizens Bond Oversight Committee (CBOC) be established to oversee use of the funds. The CBOC, of which I am Chair, has available outside bond counsel and annual CPA audits to aid it in determining if funds are used consistent with the bond language approved by the voters. Keep in mind neither the CBOC nor PUSD staff determine which projects are funded. This is solely the responsibility of the elected school Board of Trustees.

What I think will happen the voters will turn down any bond issue. District office will move; part of that land will be sold and the proceeds would be used to build a new Village HS. That way voters can't complain (much).

Pleasanton Population - 80,000 +/-.
Pleasanton Property taxpayers - 28,000, includes corporate, et el.
Pleasanton registered voters - 47,327.
Pleasanton has 58.75% of population married 15 years or longer.
Pleasanton has 52% of population with kids.
PUSD district has approximately 15,000 students.

I zoomed in for the last PUSD board meeting. I listened to Curt Below and Amanda Moss provide the FM3 analysis of the last PUSD voter survey. There was another speaker before them that was jumping up on tables waving flags how he organized a tour. He ranted for a few minutes, he referred to Pleasanton voters as "disconnect."

Curt Below and Amanda Moss described us Pleasanton voters as "uninformed, not knowledgeable." They smirked as they used these words. I understood them to imply voters in this school district are dumb.

They attempted to explain to the board that Pleasanton "voter perception is misaligned." So, Pleasanton voters, property taxpayers, were insulted by this consultant couple. If the seniors are not given a bye in this new bond, the board hopes to float, it will not pass.

No way.
Not until this board delivers on what it said it was going to do.

Fool me once, shame on you
Fool me twice, shame on me
Fool me 3x, not gunna happen

Don't be fooled by this Bond "Survey". They do not care about your opinion, they are just trying to figure out what wording for the ballot question that works best to try to get to that magic 55% percentage. They offload administrator costs to be paid for with this borrowed money so they can jack up Superintendent salaries. If you are interested in opposing this tax, please contact the Alameda County Taxpayers Association.

There is the one thing in the bond resolution that should cause all voters to say no. There is a sentence in every resolution presented that says (paraphrased): “projects listed do not have to be completed, even if there is money to do so.” So no matter how they phrase the 75 words on the ballot, it does not mean that is what they will build.

The CBOC that is mentioned above only nods their heads, because that is all they are allowed to do.

They are planning to bond $75ish million right now, and they are still deciding about what they will do with the $35mm the board said they would not bond if they didn’t build an elementary school. There are over 100 students being pushed out to schools not in their neighborhood because there is no room—100 students with no transportation other than their parents.

Lastly (?), there is a conversation about building a “small high school” of 400ish students—with the new Village HS. So a split high school of 400/100 students. I find it difficult to believe there are 400 students who want to attend a small high school. There is land they want to sell (District and Neal). Use that money to build a new school for Village.

PUSD Virtual Database Search:

Village high school was formed for students with "low grades, multiple absences, credit deficiencies".

Village high school enrollment - 106 students +/-
Village high school teachers 13 +/- 1 - did not provide substitute #s.
Village high school cost per student - $19,427.00

Amador high school student enrollment - 2638 students +/-
Amador high school teachers - 113 +/- did not provide substitute #s.
Amador high school cost per student - $6,144.00

Foothill high school student enrollment - 2320 students +/-
Foothill high school teachers - 94 +/- did not provide substitute #s.
Foothill high school cost per student - $6,260.00

When I email PUSD board members, PUSD staff, PUSD spokesperson, and the PUSD doctor guy, my emails are returned as Mailer Damon. I have questions with no one to ask of. I verified all those email addresses, and attempted multiple emails, all bounce back.

I have paid parcel taxes for two properties in this community for 25 years. I have no email voice to ask how PUSD uses my tax dollars. I1 bond was sold to parcel taxpayer as used for new school. The new school was not built. I do not care what tricky loose language is used. the bond was to build a new school.

My email voice is silenced. I can still write, somewhat!