Fred Brill is the Superintendent of the Lafayette School District, who oversees four Elementary Schools and a Middle School. He had a simple message for the Lamorinda Democratic Club and their guests, at the March 10th meeting: The School District needs help and wants support of the Measure B parcel tax of $176 to close the funding gap caused by the drop in the state funding. The salient features of his talk including responses to some questions were:
1. He visited a school this morning and was very pleased to see the high degree of volunteerism with the school. He commented that there were 5 adults in each class in the Elementary school helping kids, and that the district has received high marks on its achievements.
2. In the past 3 years the funding has been cut back by 18% with the district losing $1100 per kid.
3. Structural budget gap is $2.2 million with Measure B hoping to raise $2 million
4. They will cut the school year by 4 days to close the gap.
5. 89% of the costs are teachers and they are looking at a loss of 20 teachers.
6. The State has been an unreliable and irregular funding source.
7. Measure B would be $176 per parcel, would need 2/3rds of the voters to pass; there is a senior exemption. The election will be by Mail Ballot only.
8. The Lottery Money is a tiny amount of the $26 million budget.
9. The State’s fundamental problems continue to haunt the school district including the suspension of Prop 98 that was designed to protect school funding.
10. On paper the State owes the District $3.2 million but there is no real mechanism to force it to be paid.
11. Currently the district is getting a $333 parcel tax.
12. Frequently asked questions are available on the District’s website
After the talk Randy Shandobil (former political Editor of KTVU), who was preparing for a separate topic talk added that the Lottery Money was a sham; that all the state did was to shuffle money around so doesn’t really provide net benefit to schools.
It was noted by Brill that parcel tax money could not be taken by the State and that it would not be used to support any administrative costs.
The Club voted to endorse support of Measure B.
Bill Gram-Reefer is Editor & Publisher of Halfway To Concord, founded in 2004. Halfway To Concord is the leading online source for community-driven political news, events, and opinion for Contra Costa County and the San Francisco East Bay.
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Sign of the times:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/jobs_employment/march_2011/81_know_someone_out_of_work_and_looking_for_a_job
The proper response to declining enrollment is to adjust to changing conditions by substantially reducing operating costs. Continuing to do business as usual in the face of change is a fool’s errand and unsustainable over the long term. Voters are unlikely to reward the district with a tax increase, given current econmic conditions and the defects in the structure of this tax which places an undue burden on young families.
Asking for yet another tax increase from working families who are struggling in this economy — while exempting seniors from escalating taxes — is out-of-touch and takes real chutzpah.
No contradiction ‘Fatigued’ – we are currently enjoying the earnings benefit from a time period when California’s education spending was at or near the top. The poor investment that this state is currently making in education will come due in the next quarter century as the current well-prepared population retires and this generation of relatively poorly-prepared kids tries to compete on the competitive national and global stage.
No need to name call, Kevin. We all want the same things for our kids and our schools but see different ways to achieve that. We need to work together here, not bully those who may disagree with you. Not productive.
Also it seems you contradicted yourself – if CA per child spending is one of the lowest in the country, and California is 8th in PCI, I don’t see the correlation in spending t0 earning potential.
BTW, it’s not about the money. It’s about trying to balance a budget. We need to stop enabling bureaucracy.
Saying the money would not be used for administrative costs is a bit of a shell game. It is just a flick of an accounting entry. Administrative costs are part of any school program. And as for offering a senior exemption – what is the justification for that in a wealthy district that purports to support education? Lafayette’s is not means tested, so you are simply exempting seniors to get them not to vote for it. Why not exempt those without children as well? Or do a means test for everyone.
How does it feel to be a cheapskate?
According to the US Census Bureau, Californians enjoy the 8th highest per capita income in the US. No surprise there, we’ve always known that the good life abounds in the Sunshine State, right?
Unfortunately we are putting the future of our state in great jeopardy.
California ranks near the bottom in terms of per pupil spending – Education Week ranked us 42nd, behind most of the poorest states in the Union including Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama. And we are dropping fast – in the last 3 years, the Lafayette School District has been forced to cut $1,100 in annual funding per student.
In case you are wondering, there is a direct correlation between classroom spending, test scores and earning potential.
If passed, Lafayette’s Measure “B” will provide emergency funding to preserve core math, science, art, and music curriculums. 100% of Measure “B” funds will be spent on classroom instruction, none on administrative overhead. All for a paltry $.50/day per Lafayette household. To fix what is very definitely a “revenue problem.”
Please invest in the future – the same way that our parents and grandparents invested in us and vote yes on Measure “B” – or risk being called worse than a cheapskate.
Hmmmm . . . it seems that there is such a thing as tax fatigue among voters. Not to mention skeptical bond investors:
http://www.bondbuyer.com/issues/120_53/florida_government_shake_up-1024498-1.html
Lafayette’s Measure B is tax overkill and is unfair because it selectively applies to young voters and lets seniors off the hook. Further, the tax is unnecessary because even the District concedes that it “doesn’t have a revenue problem, but a declining enrollment problem.”
Sadly, for many government officials there is no such thing as “enough” when it comes to taxes.
Primo’s got it right: Vote NO on B.
just vote NO
simple as that