Town Square

Post a New Topic

PTA Lobbies to Lower Taxpayer Protections

Original post made by PEVC, Another Pleasanton neighborhood, on Mar 31, 2011

Debbie Look, Pleasanton resident, is the Director of Legislation for the California PTA.
Web Link
Debbie is the lobbyist for the California PTA before the California legislature in support of SCA 5
Web Link .
SCA 5 is legislation to lower the 2/3 voter approval required (to 55%) for special taxes (like the new Measure E parcel taxes).
Web Link
SCA 5 was introduced after the PTA’s attempt to place an initiative on the ballot failed. This was championed by Trustee Jeff Bowser who collected signatures at a PUSD school board meeting, and for which the PUSD School Board subsequently endorsed through a resolution. According to the PW article, Web Link (page 5) this initiative effort was started after another legislative attempt SCA 6 died in the CA Legislature.
Speaking of Jeff Bowser, let’s see if his May 29, 2009 prediction of PUSD closing two schools came true Web Link (page 10) He writes “With the additional $6 million in cuts announced by the governor the district will have no choice but to close one or two schools.”
This entire issue is worth reading for all the predictions of doom and gloom for PUSD if the 2009 Measure G parcel tax did not pass. Here we are in 2011, with student test scores rising, and PUSD showing a $4,000,000 surplus for this fiscal year.
It is worth asking. Should we trust all the 2011 doom and gloom Measure E supporters, or should we trust that our school district administration will be able to negotiate their way to a balanced budget this year.
Should we be supporting our PTA organizations as they work to lower taxpayer protections and pass new taxes, or should we say NO to Measure E and keep holding PUSD and the unions to use the annual $165,000,000 in tax revenues wisely.
What do you think?

Comments (8)

Like this comment
Posted by Drexl
a resident of Ironwood
on Mar 31, 2011 at 2:38 pm

I guess you missed the article about PMS missing the grade on no school left behind. I don't have exact number of teachers laid off, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was equivalent to one school. Stop your whining, only $100. Seriously, if this is causing you to lose sleep; you need to get medicated...

Like this comment
Posted by Drexl
a resident of Ironwood
on Mar 31, 2011 at 2:41 pm

Oh yeah, special taxes, I agree with you, need to keep 2/3rds. Renters don't care if the landlord needs to pay higher taxes; so yes, if you only allow property owners to vote, then 50% for tax increase; if everyone can vote, then needs to be 2/3.

Like this comment
Posted by comment
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 31, 2011 at 3:13 pm

$98 dollars a month for one of the best school districts in California sounds very reasonable to me. Now that the Michelle Rhee fraud/scandal is out there, this really cements a lot of yes votes. Everyone in my house and all my neighbors will be voting yes.

Yes on E.

Like this comment
Posted by What do I think?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 31, 2011 at 3:29 pm

I think the PEVC has way too much time on her hands. Didn't she actually threaten to stop throwing mud on the wall and get actively involved in some worthwhile community project? What happened? Oh, that would have meant getting out of her chair. I guess there's always one or two who want to bore a hole in the boat while everyone is paddling.

Like this comment
Posted by Start Afresh
a resident of Country Fair
on Apr 2, 2011 at 6:32 am

I believe that the taxpayer protection of 2/3 voter approval for new special taxes needs to stay in place. If the PTA organizations are lobbying to lower these protections, then it is certainly reasonable to not support them in these efforts. And certainly reasonable to vote No on E to send that message.

Like this comment
Posted by comment
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2011 at 8:33 am

You may want to send the message that 2/3 rule for parcel taxes is unreasonable. But that is not the main reason I'm voting for Measure E. The main reason is that I want to support our excellent schools.

Like this comment
Posted by Voting no
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2011 at 8:55 pm

Must watch video for those on both sides of the isle - the tax/spend crowd and limited government crowd. Very eye opening.

Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by Nomad
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 4, 2011 at 1:04 pm

Organizations like the PTA and teachers unions are doing everything they can to get a greater percentage of taxpayer money. The question is, should they? Or are there more things unions and school districts can be doing to use taxpayer dollars more efficiently.
Web Link
Which brings a new question. How are the negotiations between PUSD and APT and CSEA progressing? Are they negotating specific changes that will control costs? Will they complete and announce the negotiation results before voting progresses too far?

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Tri-Valley cities rank high in poll
By Tim Hunt | 4 comments | 635 views

What You Need to Do Before Your Child Goes to College
By Elizabeth LaScala | 0 comments | 214 views