Posted by Nick, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Jan 27, 2012 at 1:24 pm
How much of the school budgets are going to pay for pensions (for administrators, and teachers)? With all the six-figure pensions, it's no wonder they need to keep asking for more money. How much actually goes into teaching students? Until that's fixed, VOTE NO!
Instead of taxing homes, why don't we have a "pension tax" where we tax pensions above $50k/year?
Posted by kman, a resident of the Monta Loma neighborhood, on Jan 27, 2012 at 3:56 pm
Hmm, i was never called. The schools just got the added money from the Redevelopment agency being closed. Now they need more money? What about the lottery, isn't that suppose to provide money for the schools?
I agree with the posters here, NO MORE TAXES.
Someone really needs to audit what these schools are doing with all the money.
How can they replace a teacher when the teacher that is leaving is being paid the same as when they worked?
Something is really screwed up with this system. And until the people have had enough, all they will do is beg for more money.
Posted by George, a resident of the Rex Manor neighborhood, on Jan 27, 2012 at 5:49 pm
Oh Boy.... if it passes, they will have hearings so that the public can have "INPUT" into the spending spree. "INPUT" is one thing, but the "committee" will follow the Admin's recs, and it will be spent where the Admin wants it to be... Public Input will be just that... "input" without any change from plans.
In this crushing economy, I suggest that "NO" is a good word on this issue.
64 [ercemt said "YES" ??? I doubt that... This firm is paid by the MV School Board... Jeeze... do ya think it might be biased ?
Posted by Ray, a resident of the Castro City neighborhood, on Jan 28, 2012 at 8:57 am
Parents already pay for after school programs at Castro to the tune of about $120 each... er, at least the parents that feel they should contribute, and that is a significant number. The rest, well, they just take it for granted.
Posted by Steven Nelson, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Jan 28, 2012 at 10:21 am
Yolanda, I've been following this at meetings since May 2008. I would not vote for the June Bond (and I've studied over 300 pages on documents on this and have kids in MVWSD). On the 23rd I posted a discussion question on the "Town Square Forum" "Schools ad Kids" sections on why. It mainly involves lack of community prioritization via a "7-11 Committee"
(how do you use 200 dollars to get a $432 project done?) and no school for Whisman/Slatter.
The Patch (AOL's local version of the Huffington Report) has an appropriate headline "Bond Measure Likely to Pass Regardless of Election Date". There is plenty of time for "best practice" citizen input.
MANY OTHER POSTERS - you really should study how our local government can work. But be informed, or you will have almost 0 effect.
Posted by Steven Nelson, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Jan 28, 2012 at 10:50 am
Yolanda, your intuition, or recollection, is exactly right. This Bond $ cannot be used for pensions. There is a way of switching Bond (capital) to operations, at Slater and Whisman this involves turning over neighborhood schools to other organizations. Another way is use Bond $ to buy your own solar energy system (part of Measure A at the high schools) and use the savings in electricity expenses to fund classroom operations. The smart guy at the high schools (Joe White) has saved more than $500,00 this cloudless year through the new solar arrays. In this MV plan - you would have to spend down to the 'third priority' to get solar (almost the total $432 M laundry list).
Posted by Ned, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Jan 28, 2012 at 6:42 pm
I do admire and respect your knowledge regarding the schools and city. But some of us DO know how local government works, but maybe perhaps in a more negative light. For example, two of the three MVWSD administrators cited above retired at over $130,000 "legally" by spiking their salaries to end up getting MORE in retirement than while working! Thankfully Brown seems to be doing his best to make such spiking illegal in the future, but it's by no means guaranteed. Then take a look at how the last round of top admin city retirees a few years back who retired and then immediately went back to work because they were so invaluable. We even have a retired police captain who retired and claimed a disability in the eleventh hour to save on his taxes. But then you then find him biking to Sacramento with the ex-MVWSD Superintendent who was moving his mistress around to better positions while making her one of the highest paid principals before he got fired. And according to the SJMerc we also have some of the highest paid employees in the county. Their pension liabilities are going to destroy this city in the future. Yes, some of us know all too well how local government works.
Posted by Nick V, Mountain View Voice Staff Writer, on Jan 31, 2012 at 10:19 am Nick V is a member (registered user) of Mountain View Online
I put a link in the story to the master plan (see hyperlinked "master plan"). The money will be spent on projects within that document. The district, in drafting the language of the bond measure, must be very specific in what it intends to spend the money on and may not legally deviate from those stated intentions. That language has yet to be drafted.
Posted by Nick, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Jan 31, 2012 at 3:42 pm
NickV and Yolanda -- obviously the bond will highlight the most voter-friendly items (feeding sick kittens or whatever), and it will legally need to be used for those purposes, but it's naive to not look at the full budget. If these items are so critical, they could use their existing budget and cut lower priority items that they don't want you to know even exist.
So until overall spending is sustainable, and blatant abuses are under control (e.g. the lavish multimillion dollar retirement packages), VOTE NO.
Posted by Steven Nelson, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Feb 26, 2012 at 9:26 am
late comment - Nick hit it exactly (above). Note the next MV Voice articles on the June Bond. Buried in the small text at the end of the proposed legal ballot language is "District Office". Administrators would not have all the money to do the $240 M Priority One tasks, but the Administration can go down to a Priority 3 task for their own offices? "Student Facilities" ??