The first possibility was that the votes at the polling place would simply mirror those of the absentee. A second possibility is that those who voted absentee are the always voters who are most likely to support schools and libraries. The final possiblity is that the voters on election day are more liberal than those who vote absentee.
The people at the County Election Office suggested that while absentee votes have moved closer to the average, they still tend to be more conservative and less supportive of tax measures. This turned out to be the right analysis. And slowly as the tallies came in, Measures P and Q pulled away. They ended up getting 79% of the vote on Election Day compared to just 66.6 to 66.7% of the absentee vote that arrived before election day.
During the last few months, we laid out the importance of these tax measures. Without Measure P, the library would have had to severely cut back on its hours and services. Without Measure Q, schools would have seen a lot of the key programs cut.
Some have suggested that we needed to send a message to the school district about a variety of issues. I tend to agree that there are a variety of issues that the new school board and the new superintendent need to address. However, this was not the way to do it. A no vote, would not have led to a reassessment and addressing of issues, it would have been met with widespread cuts, layoffs, and mass panic. Not the atmosphere to achieve the delicate reform that some wanted.
The Vanguard spoke to Board Members Sheila Allen and Gina Daleiden who were the coordinators for Measure Q.
Sheila Allen told us:
“I am extremely pleased that the community of Davis has once again come together to support our schools and children. When the task of the Parcel Tax renewal was given to Gina and I we decided to take a very different tact than previous campaigns. The prior strategy has always been a “stealth” campaign: keeping below the radar, talking only to parents and supports, no lawn signs or public campaign, etc. This is not the way Gina and I and the current board do business. We wanted to communicate to the community what it is they pay for with their parcel tax dollars and what they get in return. We were very pleased that an informed (although low turn out) agreed that Davis students need to continue to have the programs that Measure Q pays for in the classroom.”
Gina Daleiden said:
“I am heartened by the confirmation that the vast majority of people in Davis hold children and education as a top priority.
From the very beginning of the campaign, our biggest concerns were the economy and complacency. When headlines screamed of a weak economy, higher fuel prices, foreclosures, we knew we had to work harder. And we had to get the word out about what the tax actually funds—many of the critical programs that we all have come to expect as Davis Joint Unified. We had an amazing all-volunteer effort on this campaign—a broad coalition of people united in support of our schools.
We did have a little drama as we watched the early returns. While polling and phone banking and walking can show 78 or 80% support, that only translates into real votes if people turn out at the polls. In a very low turnout election like the one last night, the “no” votes will show up and the “yes” votes you need to dilute those don’t materialize to the extent you would like in a tax election. All that said, nearly 73% is a reminder that education is a priority in Davis, even for those without students in the schools. In the end, this is about our kids and our classroom programs across the entire District. Our kids are the winner in this election.”
In the meantime, the Measure P folks finally were able to pass their parcel tax to improve and maintain the library.
On Election night County Supervisor Helen Thomson told us:
“I’m glad to see the community cares about schools and libraries.”
County Supervisor Mariko Yamada added,
“I’m glad we minded our Ps and Qs!”
We also spoke yesterday to campaign manager of the Measure P effort, Rich Peterson:
“We are absolutely delighted at the outcome of the election. Once again, Davis has shown itself to be a truly giving and caring community. On behalf of Supervisors Thomson and Yamada, I would like to thank everyone who worked so hard to help Measure P pass, in particular Jay Johnstone, the Friends of the Davis Library led by Erik Vink, and Sandy Briggs – who walked precincts with a broken collar bone!! We truly are indebted to the hard work of countless dedicated individuals, named and unnamed. Above all else, we would like to thank the Davis voters.”
This election is just the first of four elections in the next 365 days. We will talk more about the school board races in upcoming installments.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Good morning bloggers. The board election is over and the two new members are preparing to take their seats next month. P and Q have been supported by the requisite number of local voters, and the campaign settles into the dustbin of history. History, however, did not fully disclose the role that djusd paid employees and students during their instructional time participated in the measure Q “informational” campaign. Students at Davis High School,during their office assistant instructional time, under the direct supervision of administrators and administrative secretaries, copied, collated and distributed measure Q materials to faculty and community members alike. This sort of activity occured at each school in the district. The Enterprise clearly knew this was taking place and was determined not to report on this story. Is there a double standard here? A teacher at the high school had his students fold letters for 10 minutes of one class session and was scolded in the most public of ways and had his professional reputation soured. School administrators for months supervised students doing the exact same thing for Measure Q, and were given a total pass by our local media. You decide the fairness of this. Was it because the Enterprise Editor and owners opposed the candidate in question in one case and supported the school tax issue in the other? The deliberate suppression of “news” represents the worst sort of bias and deliberate attempt to craft election results seen in many an election cycle. The Enterprise got its way. Two endorsed candidates were elected and both tax measures passed. Nice going….Now the community can deal with this cover-up within our local newspaper.
Good morning bloggers. The board election is over and the two new members are preparing to take their seats next month. P and Q have been supported by the requisite number of local voters, and the campaign settles into the dustbin of history. History, however, did not fully disclose the role that djusd paid employees and students during their instructional time participated in the measure Q “informational” campaign. Students at Davis High School,during their office assistant instructional time, under the direct supervision of administrators and administrative secretaries, copied, collated and distributed measure Q materials to faculty and community members alike. This sort of activity occured at each school in the district. The Enterprise clearly knew this was taking place and was determined not to report on this story. Is there a double standard here? A teacher at the high school had his students fold letters for 10 minutes of one class session and was scolded in the most public of ways and had his professional reputation soured. School administrators for months supervised students doing the exact same thing for Measure Q, and were given a total pass by our local media. You decide the fairness of this. Was it because the Enterprise Editor and owners opposed the candidate in question in one case and supported the school tax issue in the other? The deliberate suppression of “news” represents the worst sort of bias and deliberate attempt to craft election results seen in many an election cycle. The Enterprise got its way. Two endorsed candidates were elected and both tax measures passed. Nice going….Now the community can deal with this cover-up within our local newspaper.
Good morning bloggers. The board election is over and the two new members are preparing to take their seats next month. P and Q have been supported by the requisite number of local voters, and the campaign settles into the dustbin of history. History, however, did not fully disclose the role that djusd paid employees and students during their instructional time participated in the measure Q “informational” campaign. Students at Davis High School,during their office assistant instructional time, under the direct supervision of administrators and administrative secretaries, copied, collated and distributed measure Q materials to faculty and community members alike. This sort of activity occured at each school in the district. The Enterprise clearly knew this was taking place and was determined not to report on this story. Is there a double standard here? A teacher at the high school had his students fold letters for 10 minutes of one class session and was scolded in the most public of ways and had his professional reputation soured. School administrators for months supervised students doing the exact same thing for Measure Q, and were given a total pass by our local media. You decide the fairness of this. Was it because the Enterprise Editor and owners opposed the candidate in question in one case and supported the school tax issue in the other? The deliberate suppression of “news” represents the worst sort of bias and deliberate attempt to craft election results seen in many an election cycle. The Enterprise got its way. Two endorsed candidates were elected and both tax measures passed. Nice going….Now the community can deal with this cover-up within our local newspaper.
Good morning bloggers. The board election is over and the two new members are preparing to take their seats next month. P and Q have been supported by the requisite number of local voters, and the campaign settles into the dustbin of history. History, however, did not fully disclose the role that djusd paid employees and students during their instructional time participated in the measure Q “informational” campaign. Students at Davis High School,during their office assistant instructional time, under the direct supervision of administrators and administrative secretaries, copied, collated and distributed measure Q materials to faculty and community members alike. This sort of activity occured at each school in the district. The Enterprise clearly knew this was taking place and was determined not to report on this story. Is there a double standard here? A teacher at the high school had his students fold letters for 10 minutes of one class session and was scolded in the most public of ways and had his professional reputation soured. School administrators for months supervised students doing the exact same thing for Measure Q, and were given a total pass by our local media. You decide the fairness of this. Was it because the Enterprise Editor and owners opposed the candidate in question in one case and supported the school tax issue in the other? The deliberate suppression of “news” represents the worst sort of bias and deliberate attempt to craft election results seen in many an election cycle. The Enterprise got its way. Two endorsed candidates were elected and both tax measures passed. Nice going….Now the community can deal with this cover-up within our local newspaper.
Election Watcher –
I have heard the same story from others. It does not surprise me that the Enterprise did not cover the story if kids using school time to campaign for Measure Q.
The Enterprise is basically a PR piece for causes and candidates that the editor, Debbie Davis, supports.
People who know about it should write a letter to the Editor asking her why the story was not covered. I doubt she would print it.
It’s a good thing we have the Vanguard. There is a lot taking place in our schools and our city government that we would not know about if it were not for the Vanguard.
Election Watcher –
I have heard the same story from others. It does not surprise me that the Enterprise did not cover the story if kids using school time to campaign for Measure Q.
The Enterprise is basically a PR piece for causes and candidates that the editor, Debbie Davis, supports.
People who know about it should write a letter to the Editor asking her why the story was not covered. I doubt she would print it.
It’s a good thing we have the Vanguard. There is a lot taking place in our schools and our city government that we would not know about if it were not for the Vanguard.
Election Watcher –
I have heard the same story from others. It does not surprise me that the Enterprise did not cover the story if kids using school time to campaign for Measure Q.
The Enterprise is basically a PR piece for causes and candidates that the editor, Debbie Davis, supports.
People who know about it should write a letter to the Editor asking her why the story was not covered. I doubt she would print it.
It’s a good thing we have the Vanguard. There is a lot taking place in our schools and our city government that we would not know about if it were not for the Vanguard.
Election Watcher –
I have heard the same story from others. It does not surprise me that the Enterprise did not cover the story if kids using school time to campaign for Measure Q.
The Enterprise is basically a PR piece for causes and candidates that the editor, Debbie Davis, supports.
People who know about it should write a letter to the Editor asking her why the story was not covered. I doubt she would print it.
It’s a good thing we have the Vanguard. There is a lot taking place in our schools and our city government that we would not know about if it were not for the Vanguard.
I’m glad both P & Q passed. The lack of coverage by the Enterprise on Measure Q work done on campus by students doesn’t surprise me and it should be looked into, but I am still glad that both measures passed.
I’m glad both P & Q passed. The lack of coverage by the Enterprise on Measure Q work done on campus by students doesn’t surprise me and it should be looked into, but I am still glad that both measures passed.
I’m glad both P & Q passed. The lack of coverage by the Enterprise on Measure Q work done on campus by students doesn’t surprise me and it should be looked into, but I am still glad that both measures passed.
I’m glad both P & Q passed. The lack of coverage by the Enterprise on Measure Q work done on campus by students doesn’t surprise me and it should be looked into, but I am still glad that both measures passed.
Was the material that was prepared/distributed by District employees/students on Measure Q purely “informational”? Was an effort made to keep it neutral? Did it say, vote YES on Q?
I echo the sentiments of election watcher, and would add the following cautionary comment. Measure Q did not pass by an overwhelming amount – much less of a margin than in previous years. Furthermore, citizens and teachers alike overrode the stupid self-destructive decision to close Valley Oak. Neither one of these events is a ringing endorsement of the current School Adminisistration or School Board.
I would suggest the newly elected School Board and current seated members mind their P’s and Q’s (pardon the pun). The next time around, if there is more of the same fiscal mismanagement, the voters may not be so eager to continue the school parcel tax. In my opinion, a clear message has been sent to the School Board and the School Administration that “business as usual” is not acceptable.
That being said, Davisites will now watch to see how supportive the School Board and School Administration are going to be with respect to the attempt to make Valley Oak a charter school. Any attempt by the School Board to put a monkey wrench in that effort is going to look like sour grapes. Not to mention an attempt to cover over fiscal mismanagement at the expense of minority parents who are striving to do better for their children educationally.
Let’s sit back and see just how committed the School Board will be to promote better quality education. I’m willing to give the new superintendant a fighting chance – but Davisites need to keep ever vigilant or we will get more of the same old “educational rot” we have seen in the past.
Furthermore, we need to commit to our teachers. High administrative salaries and fiscal waste at the expense of teacher salaries is no longer acceptable. The schools are just darn lucky the teachers put principle above practicality, and chose to support Measure Q despite being short-changed in contract negotiations.
Was the material that was prepared/distributed by District employees/students on Measure Q purely “informational”? Was an effort made to keep it neutral? Did it say, vote YES on Q?
I echo the sentiments of election watcher, and would add the following cautionary comment. Measure Q did not pass by an overwhelming amount – much less of a margin than in previous years. Furthermore, citizens and teachers alike overrode the stupid self-destructive decision to close Valley Oak. Neither one of these events is a ringing endorsement of the current School Adminisistration or School Board.
I would suggest the newly elected School Board and current seated members mind their P’s and Q’s (pardon the pun). The next time around, if there is more of the same fiscal mismanagement, the voters may not be so eager to continue the school parcel tax. In my opinion, a clear message has been sent to the School Board and the School Administration that “business as usual” is not acceptable.
That being said, Davisites will now watch to see how supportive the School Board and School Administration are going to be with respect to the attempt to make Valley Oak a charter school. Any attempt by the School Board to put a monkey wrench in that effort is going to look like sour grapes. Not to mention an attempt to cover over fiscal mismanagement at the expense of minority parents who are striving to do better for their children educationally.
Let’s sit back and see just how committed the School Board will be to promote better quality education. I’m willing to give the new superintendant a fighting chance – but Davisites need to keep ever vigilant or we will get more of the same old “educational rot” we have seen in the past.
Furthermore, we need to commit to our teachers. High administrative salaries and fiscal waste at the expense of teacher salaries is no longer acceptable. The schools are just darn lucky the teachers put principle above practicality, and chose to support Measure Q despite being short-changed in contract negotiations.
Was the material that was prepared/distributed by District employees/students on Measure Q purely “informational”? Was an effort made to keep it neutral? Did it say, vote YES on Q?
I echo the sentiments of election watcher, and would add the following cautionary comment. Measure Q did not pass by an overwhelming amount – much less of a margin than in previous years. Furthermore, citizens and teachers alike overrode the stupid self-destructive decision to close Valley Oak. Neither one of these events is a ringing endorsement of the current School Adminisistration or School Board.
I would suggest the newly elected School Board and current seated members mind their P’s and Q’s (pardon the pun). The next time around, if there is more of the same fiscal mismanagement, the voters may not be so eager to continue the school parcel tax. In my opinion, a clear message has been sent to the School Board and the School Administration that “business as usual” is not acceptable.
That being said, Davisites will now watch to see how supportive the School Board and School Administration are going to be with respect to the attempt to make Valley Oak a charter school. Any attempt by the School Board to put a monkey wrench in that effort is going to look like sour grapes. Not to mention an attempt to cover over fiscal mismanagement at the expense of minority parents who are striving to do better for their children educationally.
Let’s sit back and see just how committed the School Board will be to promote better quality education. I’m willing to give the new superintendant a fighting chance – but Davisites need to keep ever vigilant or we will get more of the same old “educational rot” we have seen in the past.
Furthermore, we need to commit to our teachers. High administrative salaries and fiscal waste at the expense of teacher salaries is no longer acceptable. The schools are just darn lucky the teachers put principle above practicality, and chose to support Measure Q despite being short-changed in contract negotiations.
Was the material that was prepared/distributed by District employees/students on Measure Q purely “informational”? Was an effort made to keep it neutral? Did it say, vote YES on Q?
I echo the sentiments of election watcher, and would add the following cautionary comment. Measure Q did not pass by an overwhelming amount – much less of a margin than in previous years. Furthermore, citizens and teachers alike overrode the stupid self-destructive decision to close Valley Oak. Neither one of these events is a ringing endorsement of the current School Adminisistration or School Board.
I would suggest the newly elected School Board and current seated members mind their P’s and Q’s (pardon the pun). The next time around, if there is more of the same fiscal mismanagement, the voters may not be so eager to continue the school parcel tax. In my opinion, a clear message has been sent to the School Board and the School Administration that “business as usual” is not acceptable.
That being said, Davisites will now watch to see how supportive the School Board and School Administration are going to be with respect to the attempt to make Valley Oak a charter school. Any attempt by the School Board to put a monkey wrench in that effort is going to look like sour grapes. Not to mention an attempt to cover over fiscal mismanagement at the expense of minority parents who are striving to do better for their children educationally.
Let’s sit back and see just how committed the School Board will be to promote better quality education. I’m willing to give the new superintendant a fighting chance – but Davisites need to keep ever vigilant or we will get more of the same old “educational rot” we have seen in the past.
Furthermore, we need to commit to our teachers. High administrative salaries and fiscal waste at the expense of teacher salaries is no longer acceptable. The schools are just darn lucky the teachers put principle above practicality, and chose to support Measure Q despite being short-changed in contract negotiations.
Election Watcher: “Students at Davis High School, during their office assistant instructional time, under the direct supervision of administrators and administrative secretaries, copied, collated and distributed measure Q materials to faculty and community members alike. This sort of activity occured at each school in the district. The Enterprise clearly knew this was taking place and was determined not to report on this story.”
While I share Election Watcher’s disappointment with the ethical lapses (or worse) of the school district personnel in using school time (and perhaps money) to campaign for Measure Q — I believe there were similar problems with the way library personnel campaigned for Measure P, including publishing pro-Measure Q propaganda on the library’s county website, including a guide “for more information” which sent the reader to the Yes on Q campaign headquarters and gave you its phone number — I’m not sure your anger toward The Enterprise is fully justified.
I don’t know what Jeff Hudson knew about this story. He didn’t, as you charge, report on it. But Bob Dunning, in The Davis Enterprise, wrote this last week:
CAMPAIGN CAPERS … the printed message was clear enough: “Teachers: Please hand out this Measure Q flyer to all your 3rd period students today to take home.” … so home it came in the backpacks of the two girls in this household who attend Davis’ Only Elementary School Slated for Closure … printed on green paper that did not bear the mandatory “printed on recycled paper” logo, it outlined all the reasons why my family should vote for Measure Q, which, despite my frustration with the current board, I am inclined to do …
But silly me, I had always thought it was against the law for a public school as an institution to openly campaign for a ballot measure, even if the solicitation is printed on green paper … just as I had that thought I noticed the very fine print at the bottom of the flier, print so small I had to find a second pair of glasses … “California campaign laws permit school districts to provide factual information about school funding ballot measures,” it says … “School publications are not allowed to urge voters to vote either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on any ballot measure.” … fair enough …
So I’ll let you decide about the following language contained in the flier, beginning with “The Board of Education and school district staff objectively analyzed the issues surrounding the district’s financial needs.” … are you telling me “objectively” is not a subjective word that’s open to dispute? … under the heading “How much will it cost?” we are told “The amount per homeowner assessed by Measure Q is $200 per year, a modest increase of $34 over the current parcel tax.” … let’s see, a $34 increase on a tax that’s currently $166 works out to about 20 percent … while I’m happy to pay it, I don’t think 20 percent can be classified as modest …
We later learn that “The District has stretched every dollar so that our schools rank among the best in the state.” … which explains why we hired two superintendents instead of the customary one … after extolling the “extraordinary staff” and “cost-effective operations,” this unbiased flier that is not urging me to vote “yes” or “no,” concludes, “Every student in our schools will feel the impact of these cuts in programs, services and teaching staff.” …
Election Watcher: “Students at Davis High School, during their office assistant instructional time, under the direct supervision of administrators and administrative secretaries, copied, collated and distributed measure Q materials to faculty and community members alike. This sort of activity occured at each school in the district. The Enterprise clearly knew this was taking place and was determined not to report on this story.”
While I share Election Watcher’s disappointment with the ethical lapses (or worse) of the school district personnel in using school time (and perhaps money) to campaign for Measure Q — I believe there were similar problems with the way library personnel campaigned for Measure P, including publishing pro-Measure Q propaganda on the library’s county website, including a guide “for more information” which sent the reader to the Yes on Q campaign headquarters and gave you its phone number — I’m not sure your anger toward The Enterprise is fully justified.
I don’t know what Jeff Hudson knew about this story. He didn’t, as you charge, report on it. But Bob Dunning, in The Davis Enterprise, wrote this last week:
CAMPAIGN CAPERS … the printed message was clear enough: “Teachers: Please hand out this Measure Q flyer to all your 3rd period students today to take home.” … so home it came in the backpacks of the two girls in this household who attend Davis’ Only Elementary School Slated for Closure … printed on green paper that did not bear the mandatory “printed on recycled paper” logo, it outlined all the reasons why my family should vote for Measure Q, which, despite my frustration with the current board, I am inclined to do …
But silly me, I had always thought it was against the law for a public school as an institution to openly campaign for a ballot measure, even if the solicitation is printed on green paper … just as I had that thought I noticed the very fine print at the bottom of the flier, print so small I had to find a second pair of glasses … “California campaign laws permit school districts to provide factual information about school funding ballot measures,” it says … “School publications are not allowed to urge voters to vote either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on any ballot measure.” … fair enough …
So I’ll let you decide about the following language contained in the flier, beginning with “The Board of Education and school district staff objectively analyzed the issues surrounding the district’s financial needs.” … are you telling me “objectively” is not a subjective word that’s open to dispute? … under the heading “How much will it cost?” we are told “The amount per homeowner assessed by Measure Q is $200 per year, a modest increase of $34 over the current parcel tax.” … let’s see, a $34 increase on a tax that’s currently $166 works out to about 20 percent … while I’m happy to pay it, I don’t think 20 percent can be classified as modest …
We later learn that “The District has stretched every dollar so that our schools rank among the best in the state.” … which explains why we hired two superintendents instead of the customary one … after extolling the “extraordinary staff” and “cost-effective operations,” this unbiased flier that is not urging me to vote “yes” or “no,” concludes, “Every student in our schools will feel the impact of these cuts in programs, services and teaching staff.” …
Election Watcher: “Students at Davis High School, during their office assistant instructional time, under the direct supervision of administrators and administrative secretaries, copied, collated and distributed measure Q materials to faculty and community members alike. This sort of activity occured at each school in the district. The Enterprise clearly knew this was taking place and was determined not to report on this story.”
While I share Election Watcher’s disappointment with the ethical lapses (or worse) of the school district personnel in using school time (and perhaps money) to campaign for Measure Q — I believe there were similar problems with the way library personnel campaigned for Measure P, including publishing pro-Measure Q propaganda on the library’s county website, including a guide “for more information” which sent the reader to the Yes on Q campaign headquarters and gave you its phone number — I’m not sure your anger toward The Enterprise is fully justified.
I don’t know what Jeff Hudson knew about this story. He didn’t, as you charge, report on it. But Bob Dunning, in The Davis Enterprise, wrote this last week:
CAMPAIGN CAPERS … the printed message was clear enough: “Teachers: Please hand out this Measure Q flyer to all your 3rd period students today to take home.” … so home it came in the backpacks of the two girls in this household who attend Davis’ Only Elementary School Slated for Closure … printed on green paper that did not bear the mandatory “printed on recycled paper” logo, it outlined all the reasons why my family should vote for Measure Q, which, despite my frustration with the current board, I am inclined to do …
But silly me, I had always thought it was against the law for a public school as an institution to openly campaign for a ballot measure, even if the solicitation is printed on green paper … just as I had that thought I noticed the very fine print at the bottom of the flier, print so small I had to find a second pair of glasses … “California campaign laws permit school districts to provide factual information about school funding ballot measures,” it says … “School publications are not allowed to urge voters to vote either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on any ballot measure.” … fair enough …
So I’ll let you decide about the following language contained in the flier, beginning with “The Board of Education and school district staff objectively analyzed the issues surrounding the district’s financial needs.” … are you telling me “objectively” is not a subjective word that’s open to dispute? … under the heading “How much will it cost?” we are told “The amount per homeowner assessed by Measure Q is $200 per year, a modest increase of $34 over the current parcel tax.” … let’s see, a $34 increase on a tax that’s currently $166 works out to about 20 percent … while I’m happy to pay it, I don’t think 20 percent can be classified as modest …
We later learn that “The District has stretched every dollar so that our schools rank among the best in the state.” … which explains why we hired two superintendents instead of the customary one … after extolling the “extraordinary staff” and “cost-effective operations,” this unbiased flier that is not urging me to vote “yes” or “no,” concludes, “Every student in our schools will feel the impact of these cuts in programs, services and teaching staff.” …
Election Watcher: “Students at Davis High School, during their office assistant instructional time, under the direct supervision of administrators and administrative secretaries, copied, collated and distributed measure Q materials to faculty and community members alike. This sort of activity occured at each school in the district. The Enterprise clearly knew this was taking place and was determined not to report on this story.”
While I share Election Watcher’s disappointment with the ethical lapses (or worse) of the school district personnel in using school time (and perhaps money) to campaign for Measure Q — I believe there were similar problems with the way library personnel campaigned for Measure P, including publishing pro-Measure Q propaganda on the library’s county website, including a guide “for more information” which sent the reader to the Yes on Q campaign headquarters and gave you its phone number — I’m not sure your anger toward The Enterprise is fully justified.
I don’t know what Jeff Hudson knew about this story. He didn’t, as you charge, report on it. But Bob Dunning, in The Davis Enterprise, wrote this last week:
CAMPAIGN CAPERS … the printed message was clear enough: “Teachers: Please hand out this Measure Q flyer to all your 3rd period students today to take home.” … so home it came in the backpacks of the two girls in this household who attend Davis’ Only Elementary School Slated for Closure … printed on green paper that did not bear the mandatory “printed on recycled paper” logo, it outlined all the reasons why my family should vote for Measure Q, which, despite my frustration with the current board, I am inclined to do …
But silly me, I had always thought it was against the law for a public school as an institution to openly campaign for a ballot measure, even if the solicitation is printed on green paper … just as I had that thought I noticed the very fine print at the bottom of the flier, print so small I had to find a second pair of glasses … “California campaign laws permit school districts to provide factual information about school funding ballot measures,” it says … “School publications are not allowed to urge voters to vote either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on any ballot measure.” … fair enough …
So I’ll let you decide about the following language contained in the flier, beginning with “The Board of Education and school district staff objectively analyzed the issues surrounding the district’s financial needs.” … are you telling me “objectively” is not a subjective word that’s open to dispute? … under the heading “How much will it cost?” we are told “The amount per homeowner assessed by Measure Q is $200 per year, a modest increase of $34 over the current parcel tax.” … let’s see, a $34 increase on a tax that’s currently $166 works out to about 20 percent … while I’m happy to pay it, I don’t think 20 percent can be classified as modest …
We later learn that “The District has stretched every dollar so that our schools rank among the best in the state.” … which explains why we hired two superintendents instead of the customary one … after extolling the “extraordinary staff” and “cost-effective operations,” this unbiased flier that is not urging me to vote “yes” or “no,” concludes, “Every student in our schools will feel the impact of these cuts in programs, services and teaching staff.” …
In my opinion, a clear message has been sent to the School Board and the School Administration that “business as usual” is not acceptable.
A 27.1% “no” vote is a clear message of dissatisfaction?
In my opinion, a clear message has been sent to the School Board and the School Administration that “business as usual” is not acceptable.
A 27.1% “no” vote is a clear message of dissatisfaction?
In my opinion, a clear message has been sent to the School Board and the School Administration that “business as usual” is not acceptable.
A 27.1% “no” vote is a clear message of dissatisfaction?
In my opinion, a clear message has been sent to the School Board and the School Administration that “business as usual” is not acceptable.
A 27.1% “no” vote is a clear message of dissatisfaction?
I disagree that the level of ‘no’ on Q will send a clear message…..and the two new Board members are the most negative or wishy on VO….I would not be surprised if there are delays, etc. Hopefully the current board might vote quickly on moving it along.
As far as Rich’s comments on P and library material, I was involved with the Measure P campaign and we were very careful in what informational material was available AT the library. To my knowledge there was no campaign material available within the walls of the libary and certainly some facts on a sheet with a phone number for more info was OK’d by legal advice. Also, to my knowledge all volunteer efforts by any county and specifically library staff was done ‘on their own time’.
I disagree that the level of ‘no’ on Q will send a clear message…..and the two new Board members are the most negative or wishy on VO….I would not be surprised if there are delays, etc. Hopefully the current board might vote quickly on moving it along.
As far as Rich’s comments on P and library material, I was involved with the Measure P campaign and we were very careful in what informational material was available AT the library. To my knowledge there was no campaign material available within the walls of the libary and certainly some facts on a sheet with a phone number for more info was OK’d by legal advice. Also, to my knowledge all volunteer efforts by any county and specifically library staff was done ‘on their own time’.
I disagree that the level of ‘no’ on Q will send a clear message…..and the two new Board members are the most negative or wishy on VO….I would not be surprised if there are delays, etc. Hopefully the current board might vote quickly on moving it along.
As far as Rich’s comments on P and library material, I was involved with the Measure P campaign and we were very careful in what informational material was available AT the library. To my knowledge there was no campaign material available within the walls of the libary and certainly some facts on a sheet with a phone number for more info was OK’d by legal advice. Also, to my knowledge all volunteer efforts by any county and specifically library staff was done ‘on their own time’.
I disagree that the level of ‘no’ on Q will send a clear message…..and the two new Board members are the most negative or wishy on VO….I would not be surprised if there are delays, etc. Hopefully the current board might vote quickly on moving it along.
As far as Rich’s comments on P and library material, I was involved with the Measure P campaign and we were very careful in what informational material was available AT the library. To my knowledge there was no campaign material available within the walls of the libary and certainly some facts on a sheet with a phone number for more info was OK’d by legal advice. Also, to my knowledge all volunteer efforts by any county and specifically library staff was done ‘on their own time’.
There’s a reason why it’s called “The Empty-prise.” I only use it to find out about local goings on. Other than that, unless it’s an AP wire feed, it’s skeptical at best.
There’s a reason why it’s called “The Empty-prise.” I only use it to find out about local goings on. Other than that, unless it’s an AP wire feed, it’s skeptical at best.
There’s a reason why it’s called “The Empty-prise.” I only use it to find out about local goings on. Other than that, unless it’s an AP wire feed, it’s skeptical at best.
There’s a reason why it’s called “The Empty-prise.” I only use it to find out about local goings on. Other than that, unless it’s an AP wire feed, it’s skeptical at best.