Letters to the editor | May 1, 2009 | Danville Express | DanvilleSanRamon.com |


Danville Express

Perspective - May 1, 2009

Letters to the editor

Measure C - Déjà vu all over again

Dear Editor:

Measure C will raise "local funds that will be spent only in the SRVUSD, to reduce class sizes, (and to) restore ... essential programs." Senior citizens may apply "for an exemption." Expenditures will be reviewed "annually in an open, public hearing." Measure C would restore "programs and services cut the last two years."

Those were among tax-promoter pretenses during the San Ramon Valley Unified School District's 1991 Measure C parcel-tax campaign (www.noonc.info). The 1991-92 district general-fund revenues provided $6,092 per student, in today's dollars.

With California facing a massive politician-generated fiscal crisis then as now, 1991's Measure C failed. But SRVUSD programs continued and revenues climbed rapidly anyway - at much faster rates than inflation and enrollment growth combined.

By 2003-04, before finally passing a parcel tax, SRVUSD was collecting $7,951 per student (again, constant dollars). This year, it's $8221 - not just the $5,725 the Danville Weekly reported last week.

Promoting 2004's parcel tax, district PR spokesman Terry Koehne proclaimed "an understanding there will not be a pay raise next year." But 2005's retroactive raise was just the first of four subsequent raises, atop existing step-and-column increases.

Now, says Koehne (April 24), "Since Proposition 13 passed, education funding in this state has declined."

No, it hasn't. California's inflation-adjusted per-student funding is higher now, by 50 percent, than in 1978. And SRVUSD's own per-student funding has jumped by a third just since 1991's Measure C rejection.

Sensible 2009 Measure C voters will assure Election Office receipt of their No votes by next Tuesday!

Michael Arata



Like this comment
Posted by Community courtesy
a resident of another community
on May 1, 2009 at 6:53 am

Dear Dolores,

In e-exchanges in the Iron Horse corridor neighborhoods, I was surprised how a majority does not know Michael James Arata and the small SRVUSD opposition known as COUNT from many years. "Hal, this Mike is not asking the right questions or focusing on the right results," said many in e-exchange, "it isn't the amount of money received, but what needs to be done with those funds."

In-depth analysis of the SRVUSD budget information on their website has been summarized as a sources and uses of funds statement illustrating just how our parcel taxes serve students. Thousands of neighbors in e-exchanges would welcome further commentary on needed funds usages in education, operations and facilities by Mike and others. Among this large number of district voters in neighborhoods, the deciding factor in voting was and is the needed usage of funds and not the history of COUNT actions and per student state funding.

Let's continue the dialog,

Hal, as a community courtesy