|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
At a study session on Nov. 30, officials at the San Ramon Valley Unified School District discussed implementing a bond measure to fund capital improvement projects throughout the district. While no action was taken, the district’s Board of Education will consider the bond at its Dec. 6 meeting.
The potential bond measure would pay for construction, modernization and possibly solar power at several schools, most notably at Stone Valley Middle School and San Ramon Valley High, said Community Relations Coordinator Terry Koehne. SRVUSD staff would aim to get the bond measure on the June 5, 2012 ballot.
“The district’s identified large ticket maintenance items that are well over $100 million. The bond amount is dependent upon what the board thinks is necessary and what the electorate might support,” said Gary Black, assistant superintendent for business services. “Unfortunately we typically have more needs than we do dollars. The last bond was $260 million in 2002.”
Although the district is still in discussion mode, it has identified a list of potential capital projects that total over $235 million. The bond amount has not yet been determined, but will be solidified through resident polling and further deliberation by the board.
“The discussion is really about capital needs and future budget planning, it wasn’t just bond. The bond would be one of the options to fund public projects, but some of the bigger ticket items could not be done without a bond,” Black said.
If the district is not able to put a bond measure on the June ballot, the vote could take place in the Nov. 6, 2012 general election.
We are already currently paying for two different parcel taxes for our school district. The school district recently said they had a “surplus” of money, and decided to pay teachers for a day they did not even come to school or work. Now, the same school district, wants more of our money through his bond, to build expensive construction projects? No way! The recession has hit us parents in Danville just like everywhere else, and we are tired of this school district treating us like we are a never ending source of new taxes and bonds. Enough is enough. Live within your means like we do. If you have a “surplus” of OUR money, return it to us, and stop playing shell games with new bonds and taxes for construction we can not afford. I am sure most voters agree with me, especially in this economy. If this board tries to force this new tax bond on us, I suggest we start a petition to recall all the school board members who vote for this.
The SRVUSD, with its usual sense of good timing, is plunging ahead with another tax measure. To tie any of it to additional Solar Power is folly. Let’s wait at least a year to gain some experience with the Solar Power installations we already have before pouring more money into this technology.
Along the same lines with Duffy, if we had construction projects that need money WTH were you doing putting money in solar rather than using it for construction? That is what QSCB’s are for! We have absolute imbeciles running our school district.
I am a parent of three SRVUSD graduates AND I am a retired SRVUSD teacher.
“On the ground” classroom supplies are underfunded(except for a plethora of electronics).
Big ticket resume building items that pad resumes are the priority of the current regime.
Common sense(and, by the way, common decency on the part of some of the little darlings parents sent to me) is out of style.
Say “No” to bond measures and bad mannered children.
The track record is terrible with getting construction projects built properly. Look at the seismic problems with the SRVHS gym being reconstructed ahead of time because of construction defects. I’d rather spend funds on maintaining and inspecting the buildings we have now to make sure they were actually constructed properly. Also, are the solar panels being manufactured in the US, if so they are probably overpriced, or if they are competitively priced, they are from China, not how I’d want money spent in either case.
As a private person, you can attempt to live within your means and be fairly successful in the effort. But what happens when more people move into your home and expect to be fed? Living within your means just went out the window.
This is the situation the school district is in. They can easily “live within their means” if nothing changes, but this is a growth area (due in no small part to the excellence of our schools). That means that more and more people (students) are moving in. It costs money to deal with the influx of people. We can’t turn them away.
“Living within their means” is impossible for a growing school district.
“Wise Owl”: The problem with your analogy is with more students moving into the district, the district does actually gets more money from the government in funding, while I do not get anymore money from the government if more people move into my home. “Living within their means” applies to our school district, and they are failing miserably at it. I also think there are people who work for the school district whose jobs solely relate to construction projects, and thus to keep their own jobs going they are leading the lobbying for more taxes for more construction. These are the first people who should be laid off if there is a budget problem. However, there is no budget problem, as our district recently said they have a “surplus” and that is why they gave the teachers money for not even showing up at work.
What I don’t understand is why they are suggesting additions and new fields and track for Dougherty Valley H.S. when the other 3 high schools in the District have a much greater need for modernization and expansion. Make Cal, SRV and MV the first priorities. DVHS is sparkling new and should be excluded when there are finite funds for the high schools at this time.
It’s important to realize that the state has cut education dollars dramatically. The “government” provides less and less funding for schools each year. A growing student enrollment means that the school district goes deeper in the hole for each new student regardless of mythical “government” funding.
I wish that it were not true, but it is.
WiseOwl — also the new residents moving in are paying about 150% of taxes that you and I are paying (clearly you are referring to “new” people moving into new developments in San Ramon).
I agree with live within the means and no more taxes. Ask me for more taxes when employees are de-unionized in the school district.
Oh — and just to clarify — they do not pay higher taxes because of higher house prices but because of school taxes. For example, Windemere has a tax rate as high as 1.7% (whereas all the rest of the SRVUSD area is 1.25%)
All the above comments against another bond issue are valid. The school board is owned by the teacher’s union and this would be another case of using all of the tax dollars to support their agenda.