As much criticism and complaints that get thrown at our public officials, it’s always important to remember that they are volunteers. Yes, they may get tiny little stipends for their service, but it’s not nearly enough to cover the expense of their time. And certianly it’s not as if they are doing it for the fame and glory, after all, how many Alamedans could accurately name and/or pick out from a line up all five members of our City Council let alone all five members of our School Board? Which I suppose was the reason why the League of Women Voters held a “Meet your Public Officials” event last night at the Harbor Bay Community Club. Which I learned very late yesterday was not just to meet the City Council and School Board, but all the other folks that sit on boards and commissions. I would have gone except for the fact that it was all the way out on Bay Farm Island which takes me 15 minutes to get there which would have meant a 30 minute round trip.
Hopefully next year’s event will occur somewhere mid-Island so that it is equidistance for all residences. Anyway, for those that did go, how was it?
So all that was a lead up to the Alameda Sun’s article about the School Board Meeting on Tuesday, where the School Board members would be voting on what programs to prioritize if Measure H gets passed. I haven’t watched the meeting yet, but from all accounts it sounds actually very interesting. It’s always vastly entertaining to see people sitting on the dias get snippy with one another.
According to the article the School Board was at loggerheads over two issues, one was brought up by Tracy Jensen that she didn’t feel as if that it was appropriate to prioritize what they would restore without first receiving a bugdet. The second issue was brought up by Janet Gibson who felt as though the piddly School Board stipends should be on the list of items to restore.
I have to disagree with both of them. Personally, it’s important that the School Board reassures the voting public that if they vote for Measure H, these are the programs and services that will get restored. And reagrding the stipends, while I respect the work and the time that is put in by our volunteer School Board, it is as mentioned by Bill Schaff, a statement that the Board itself is sacrificing their small stipend in order to put the business of the School District first.
According to the Alameda Sun article and Mike McMahon’s website these are the items that were recommended, and the majority of the board voted to restore, in the case of Measure H’s passage:
- Elementary music grades 1-3
- Reduction of high school atheltics and closure of swim centers
- 9th grade class size reduction
- Reduction of high school advanced placement sections
- Reduction of middle school counselors
- Reduction of clerical support at Encinal High School
And completely off topic, this Saturday marks the second Alameda Civic Light Opera Trivia Challenge, so if you think that you are smarter than the average bear, find two others, pony up the $330 to enter and kick some Alamedan ass! Or for $35 you can have dinner and watch from the audience all the while muttering the answers under your breath and then feeling superior when you get the answer right and the teams on stage do not. It’s a win – win either way.
sorry to be off topic…. but this post looks kind of open… I’m surprised you haven’t mentioned that SunCal defaulted.
http://www.alamedasun.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3161&Itemid=10
Apparently they have defaulted elsewhere. The headline “SunCal Sends Cash After Deadline” is a little misleading because at the time of the article (and as far as we know, as of this morning) the money has NOT been received.
Isn’t this a big deal?
Comment by Jack B — April 25, 2008 @ 8:51 am
no takers?
well… somebody is bound to find this link interesting.
http://www.swop.net/2008/03/suncal-defaults-on-loans-abq-journal.html
Comment by Jack B — April 25, 2008 @ 10:36 am
SunCal’s funds were in their account by Thursday morning, probably too late to update the Alameda Sun as they go to press on Wednesday night/Thursday morning
Comment by Lauren Do — April 25, 2008 @ 11:25 am
May I ask… how you know this?
Thanks.
Comment by Jack B — April 25, 2008 @ 11:38 am
The fact that they defaulted period isn’t exactly encouraging in regards to their financial health. Home builders are going belly-up every day. We’ll see what happens with Suncal.
Comment by edvard — April 25, 2008 @ 2:45 pm
I have to disagree with you Lauren, and I recognize Bill Schaff for this and many other financial contributions he has been able to make to schools he chooses.
I agree with Janet Gibson that the piddly School Board stipends should be on the list of items to restore. I recognize the grace of Bill Schaff to donate his share, and that it is much easier for a wealthy person to donate, but the BOE is not supposed to be a club for the wealthy – it should be more representative of the entire community, and for many the stipend may be needed to hire a sitter while a parent studies documents or attends meetings.
Comment by David Kirwin — April 25, 2008 @ 3:41 pm
Also while it is important for taxpayers to know how “H” funds would be spent before we vote on it, it is also important for the BOE to know how much funds the district will be getting from the State and “H”, before setting priorities on “H” funds alone.
BTW, I’ve not heard a response to other questions – I understand that AUSD has negotiated a raise next year for our teachers – How is that going to be paid for? Measure “H” perhaps? In 2010 we will have to submit a 3-year budget to the COE – How will we do that with all the parcel taxes ending in 2012?
Comment by David Kirwin — April 25, 2008 @ 3:48 pm
I caught a few minutes of the animated discussion at the School Board meeting but not the whole thing. From what I understtod, Tracy Jensen’s concerns were pretty nuanced and I don’t think she got her point across as well as she could have – because it is, in fact, an important point.
Her focus seemed to be on the possibility that the budget problems could get even worse in the future. While she didn’t spell it out (at least in the portion that I watched), I think she was anticipating even larger revenue reductions in years to come. So if, for instance, AUSD is required to make $6 million or $7 million in budget cuts over a longer period of time, Measure H dollars would go first to restoring music, high school athletics, etc. and only when those programs again were fully funded would Measure H dollars go to, for instance, dealing with class size reduction and teacher layoffs. In other words, in a school funding apocalypse (which is not completely unlikely), even more alarming cuts than those currently on the board would have to take a backseat to restoring the items in the prioritized list. I think she was just trying to make the point that because we don’t know whether the future will bring even larger cuts, we shouldn’t be prioritizing Measure H dollars for items that a couple years down the road may turn out to be the lesser of some really horrible evils.
As to the stipend that is so treasured by Janet Gibson, there was some discussion about the sacrifice that is made by board members, but another focus was on the language of Measure H — which does not include a provision that would allow the dollars to go to Board stipends. So regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Ms. Gibson, it seems that Measure H dollars probably cannot properly be used for board stipends.
Comment by Page — April 25, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
DK,
Any raise to teachers next year is in the contract negotiated last year. I’m not certain, but I haven’t seen the raises in the cuts, so if H is targeted at those cuts, one would suppose the salary issue is not part of that equation.
Ultimately the budget is one pool of money and the bottom line must pencil out. In one sense if Measure H balances the budget then it goes toward everything, but if raises weren’t in the cuts then one would assume H would not be used specifically for salary.
In terms of accountability, I guess it is important where Measure H funds go, but since the budget is 80 plus % salary, would it be scandalous misuse of funds if Measure H stabilized previously negotiated salary increases?
Comment by Mark I — April 25, 2008 @ 5:41 pm
I think it would be politically insensitive for the board not to have gone on the record as to how they will prioritize spending of Measure H funds (should it pass), given the currently available information – and that is essentially what they did this week.
I also think it would be naive of Alameda voters to expect the Board to stick to that plan if new information regarding the budget becomes available in future, and we have even less money in the school budget than we currently anticipate. I’d consider this Board and any future one to be failing in their duties if they were to do that.
Comment by Andy Currid — April 25, 2008 @ 6:11 pm
I am sorry if you disagree, but I want to see the Teachers get an increase in pay, as well as, the administrators. As far as I know they all do their job and do it well. I have worked for Corporate America and giving up their career as a teacher or administrator, in both situations they would make more. What corporate president makes less than an administrator? Pay them what they deserve…they are your children not mine…as we don’t have any…yet.
Comment by Joel — April 25, 2008 @ 6:31 pm
The tax measure will be binding if passed by the voters, but the priorities voted upon by the board will not be binding. One could argue that the only reason that the board “set” priorities is to get the measure approved.
Comment by AlamedaNayTiff — April 25, 2008 @ 6:32 pm
Well we could always aspire to be like Berkeley USD where they been passing parcel taxes since the 80s and now count on 25% of their budget from parcel revenues. In addition, their Board members get $18,000 per year in Board stipends.
Comment by SourPuss — April 25, 2008 @ 7:41 pm
#13
Already Alameda schools are better than Berkeley schools. Or is it just that our teachers or students or both are better? Or maybe it is the parents, who on average may earn less money, but may put in more time to help and encourage our students? Maybe it is that ’small town charm’ that reinforces families helping families and other beneficial networking and cooperation in our little town that has been lost in the bigger city of Berkeley where fewer families want to send their kids to public school. Why pay more to get less?
Comment by Sweet tooth — April 25, 2008 @ 9:27 pm
As the President of the League, I was of course at the Meet Your Public Officials (MYPO) event, and I was very proud of the efforts of many in our League to put on an evening of good food, drink and conversation. You are right about the public officials (elected and appointed) doing a lot without compensation, and we always appreciate their coming out to chat with anyone who shows up and has something to say.
Your comments about a central location are well taken – we have looked for a more central place that has a kitchen, a bar area, and plenty of room to circulate – not to mention a podium and good sound system,and so far we haven’t found one – at least one which does not charge a huge amount. Since the money we raise at the MYPO is spent on buying voter education materials and our expenses related to educating ourselves and others on important issues, we try to keep down our costs – the food, drink and decorations, including the lovely flowers, are all donated by our members or local merchants. The Harbor Bay Community Room meets our needs and always looks nice – does anyone have any ideas (or better yet a donated place) for us for a more centrally located venue similar to it?
And by the way, our next event is on May 6th at the Stafford Meeting Room of the Main Library, when we will be doing our Pros and Cons on the ballot measures, including Measures H (our School Parcel Tax) and F (the utility tax for the unicorporated areas all the County will be voting on), and the two state propositions, as well as a candidate’s forum to hear Wilma Chan and Loni Hancock, who are vying for Don Perata’s Senate seat. Starts at seven p.m.
For those who have weighed in on both sides of the parcel tax measure, here is your opportunity to ask more questions and let others know of your point of view. We expect APandT and Comcast to film the event for reshowing on the community access channels.
Comment by Kate Quick — April 25, 2008 @ 10:31 pm
SourPuss, your moniker is well chosen. We could aspire to what you allude in Berkeley but I don’t think we have that inclination and in fact none of the supporters of H want to be doing this campaign, though it seems cynics who oppose us will always say we are being sneaky and are really out to gradually ratchet up local spending indefinitely.
If you are at all open minded about the issue, go to http://www.alamedaschools.org/ and read the entire FAQ section on Measure H. Then hopefully you will not be so cynical.
Comment by Mark I — April 26, 2008 @ 11:39 am
Mark I, wouldn’t you agree that perhaps some effort could be made to eliminate AUSD and place public schools under the city administration. The BofE could be appointed by the city council and the system could be run like any other city department. The advantage to this could be in the funding arena.
Comment by Jack Richard — April 26, 2008 @ 2:18 pm
Current city leadership couldn’t run a whorehouse on an army base — I’ll cast my lot with the AUSD board.
Though it is a very low bar, they have shown themselves vastly better able to handle money than City Hall.
Comment by dave — April 26, 2008 @ 2:58 pm
Which one’s raising taxes?
Comment by Jack Richard — April 26, 2008 @ 5:05 pm
#19
Jack – Schools don’t tax anyone’s income, purchases, businesses or property. From what my kids say; their developing brains are being taxed, but that is okay.
If I gave my kids an allowance and told them I would no longer buy toys or games and that they would have to learn to save and budget the money I gave them weekly, I would expect they could do that. But what if I gave them a little more money and told them they would also have to buy their own food and clothing? And what would you expect would then happen if I started cutting back on their allowance increases and told them they had to start paying part of the mortgage, parcel, taxes etc? Don’t you think they would have to get funded for those expenses? They are too young to get a job, and like school districts, they are legally forbidden to be ‘income producers’? Don’t you think that would put them in a bit of a bind? (Can you imagine American schools going the way of the penal system and selling cheap labor? The again it seems the cost of holding prisoners went up when their labor was sold. Wonder why…)
Are you starting to get my drift, or is this not a clear analogy for the school districts in this state that are completely dependant on their income from the state; – unless the voters in the locality choose to have property owners pay to help out.
There are other small pieces of local income that help too; like donations – or Sunday’s “Circus for the Arts”. I’d like to see more shows at Kofman that were AUSD benefits. We could get dinner and a shoe, stay in town, help local merchants, our schools, and the city’s treasury through sales tax.
Also if you want to help out Encinal or Franklin schools, you can donate to AEF (Until I see an accounting of their expenditures, I will assume my friends are correct when they refer to AEF as “Alamedans for Encinal and Franklin”. From what I am told – no ‘outsiders’ are allowed to see their expense sheets, it certainly is not part of their web site.)Personally, I always prefer direct donations as opposed to giving it to a ‘middleman’ organization.
Comment by David Kirwin — April 26, 2008 @ 8:56 pm
Re 17–
That is how it used to be done– the school board was appointed. Not sure when we changed to an elected board, but don’t laugh– appointed boards used to be considered the norm.
Comment by Kevis Brownson — April 26, 2008 @ 11:25 pm
# 18
Dave, it seems the Feds couldn’t run a whorehouse either…at least not for profit. The IRS seized the Mustang Ranch in Nevada for tax shenanigans, took over running it and immediately started losing money. Probably screwed themselves building a new (beautiful) parking structure.
# 20
“- Schools don’t tax anyone’s income, purchases, businesses or property.”
“Are you starting to get my drift…,… for the school districts in this state that are completely dependant on their income from the state; – unless the voters in the locality choose to have property owners pay to help out.”
I’m not sure I do get your drift, because under your description the state doesn’t tax anybody either. The point I was trying to make was that the crutch AUSD uses to justify a parcel tax is that it’s the only method they legally have to raise money. My suggestion was to take that crutch away and place Alameda public schools under city control. There they can languish in the wheelchair of city benevolence.
Two other points: (1) If I were your kid, I’d run away. (2) AEF appears to me to be a lobby organization interested primarily in furthering their own agenda. I agree with your direct donation preference.
Comment by Jack Richard — April 27, 2008 @ 9:49 am
re #19
Jack,
Which is building multi-milion dollar white elephants? Which has wasted tens of millions on a second rate cable system? Which is staring a junk-level credit rating in the face? I’ll give you hint: it ain’t the school district.
Which one has no control over more 90% of its funding? Which has the most state mandates to meet? Which has performed well despite constant funding pressure? Hint #2: not the city.
How have you lived so long without learning the difference between investment and waste?
Comment by dave — April 27, 2008 @ 10:11 am