Town Square

Post a New Topic


Original post made by Joe, Downtown, on Apr 27, 2009

All voters considering the Measure G proposal in June and the State measures in May should go to the Howard Jarvis web site at for some required reading that goes beyond your pamphlets. Those voters leaning to a yes on G need to do a search on the hjta site for "parcel taxes". It should change your mind because it details just about everything that PUSD is doing through their election advisors to get G past the voters.
This is not a one time tax to help the district through hard times. Asthe residents of Livermore and San Ramon can attest, PUSD will be back again and for more.

Comments (14)

Like this comment
Posted by AVHS Dad
a resident of Stoneridge Park
on Apr 27, 2009 at 2:04 pm

AVHS Dad is a registered user.

"Required reading"? Most people probably won't even read the description on the ballot. They'll vote based on what they've heard.

Like this comment
Posted by Get out of the wagon
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 27, 2009 at 2:14 pm


You are right. Even those that have read or poked around and admit they don't want the tax then also say they are fearful that our kids' programs will be cut if they don't vote for the parcel tax.

It's not true! They distric simply cannot just cut programs because a parcel tax didn't pass. If they truly want it for programs, then apparently they only need approx 3 - 3.5 MM; The rest of the tax goes to salaries.

Everyone: Please vote "No!" on Measure G and let's really get to work. We need people to locate funding/grants, etc. We need to get a community profile of what is important to us over at the district. We need to get accurate info from the District on their numbers, including perks and other ways money can be saved. We need to have the managerial raises from the past few years rolled back.

The point: Before saddling the community with a tax that will not be limited to the next four years, as we've seen in San Ramon and Livermore locally, let's really educate our kids and dig in as a educated, resourceful community and make a real difference in working through the issues at PUSD.

Let's identify our needs, look at ALL of our resources BEFORE a tax and figure out what we need to do. After we have exhausted all other avenues, if we still have a shortfall, let's talk a parcel tax at that time...although if all of this happens, I highly doubt (pure speculation on my part) we'll never need one.

A tax is never an end; it's a beginning.

"No!" on G.

Like this comment
Posted by Yes on G
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 27, 2009 at 4:03 pm

Save our schools, our children, and our home values.

Vote yes because we have a lot to lose should this measure fails!

Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 27, 2009 at 4:11 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

Our children don't need saving.

Like this comment
Posted by john adams
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Apr 27, 2009 at 4:14 pm

Save our schools, our children and our home values!

Vote NO because passing this measure teaches our children that irresponsible government spending should be rewarded!

Vote NO because the only arguments to vote yes are emotional.

Read solid facts at Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by ChangedmyMind
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 27, 2009 at 4:25 pm

Since the Parcel Tax seems to be on my mind lately, I happened upon a website called ORRICK,HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLC which among other things is in the business of helping school districts with Parcel Taxes. One interesting nugget caught my eye, and I quote:"...considering the ongoing State budget difficulties, we might expect to see legislative proposals in the future cutting State aid to school districts that have demonstrated an ability and willingness to pass local Parcel Tax measures for educational programs." Possible reduction of State funds is another reason to vote No and even though this was written 4yrs ago it still has validity.
Since I don't know the inner workings of PUSD, I'm not saying that this is the firm that they have employed but they do have offices in California.
To read more go to and I hope AVHS Dad is wrong about the voters in Pleasanton.

Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 27, 2009 at 4:32 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

PUSD is going by the playbook! Web Link

1 - Hire expensive consultants "These consultants often advise local officials not to publicize the parcel tax election to the entire community, but to target only their supporters."

2- Schedule low-turnout special elections "a majority of the local school parcel tax elections over the past few years have been low turnout special elections"

3- Wage an information campaign using government resources "Since it is illegal for local officials to use public resources (including public funds) to urge a vote for or against a political issue ...This often means putting up signs or sending out material stating all the "good things" a parcel tax will do, but stopping just short of telling people how to vote."

4- Get people to believe there will be dire consequences for not voting yes. "Such scare tactics are frequently observed with parcel tax measures associated with public education, health, and public safety."

5- Put the annual cost in friendly terms like "It's only x cents a day" "Officials try to make it sound like the coming property tax increase is trivial and that anyone who is opposed must be a cheapskate."

Also "It is very important for taxpayers to prevent local parcel taxes from being initially imposed. Although most parcel taxes are imposed for a fixed period of time, statistics reveal that the vast majority of parcel taxes initially approved by voters are subsequently placed on the ballot by the local government in order to extend the tax. In many of these cases, the tax amount is increased in addition to being extended.

Thus, most parcel taxes that are initially approved effectively become permanent, and taxpayers should be very wary of claims made by tax proponents that a tax is a "temporary solution" to a funding "problem." Taxpayers must expect any "temporary" parcel tax that is approved will be submitted for extension at some point in the future. "

Like this comment
Posted by ChangedmyMind
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 27, 2009 at 4:35 pm

To Yes on G
"Save our schools, our children, and our home values"- This is just emotional campaigning. FACTS AND INFORMATION is what these posts and this election should be about. The yes-G people have nothing to offer to the debate but emotional slogans and they are becoming a bore.

Like this comment
Posted by Joe
a resident of Downtown
on Apr 27, 2009 at 4:42 pm

To Stacy-Thanks for the Link. I would have done it, but I'm a little slow with these computer contraptions.

Like this comment
Posted by Joe
a resident of Downtown
on Apr 27, 2009 at 4:56 pm

To Changed my mind-I made a comment about that on another post, but I couldn't remember where I had read it. Thanks for reminding me.

Like this comment
Posted by Community of Character
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 27, 2009 at 6:24 pm

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!

Like this comment
Posted by Stu Gazzo
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 27, 2009 at 7:13 pm

Comm.of Char. What sacrifice? 2 less work days and they still get a raise...big whoop! Postpone/freeze the SC raises, then you can talk about sacrifice. Emotional drivel "to save our schools,our children, and our community." The children, schools and the community will survive and thrive without Measure-G...THIS ISN'T ARMAGEDDON.

Like this comment
Posted by Reader
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 27, 2009 at 7:34 pm

To Community...
You seem to post the same message on different posts. Aren't you bored yet, use some imagination, hey I know, get a thesaurus then at least you can spice it up a bit. You know what a thesaurus is, dont you ?

Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Apr 27, 2009 at 8:17 pm

Community of Character - I've asked the following to every Measure G supporter hoping to get a response, yet everyone has avoided the issue. So again I ask, how is measure G ethically, socially, and fiscally responsible when the district says there is no money for our children's programs but is planning to pay out S&C increases over the next four years?

If it were you, could you go to a community to ask them for tax dollars knowing many of them are taking pay cuts, being forced to take days off, and even being laid off - and pay yourself a salary increase? If I believe your screen name is a reflection on you, I cannot imagine you would sleep well at night doing so. So why is it ok for our schools to do it? I have no problem helping fund our schools, but not when the district plans on using my money to fund salary increases. There is nothing unreasonable in requesting freezes to salary increases for the duration of the parcel tax.

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

Sound and Fury over Vile and Slur-ry
By Tom Cushing | 97 comments | 1,456 views

New state housing requirements could affect Pleasanton
By Jeb Bing | 6 comments | 583 views

Time for new collaboration between city and school district
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 369 views