Yesterday someone in the comment section asked me how much I was getting paid by the district, implying that I was a shill for them. I can understand how someone would feel that way. I have spent many many hours in the last year working on this blog and elsewhere to get Measure W passed.
Granted I have been talking about a parcel tax for far longer, but the first mention of Measure W was August 3, 2008 on this blog. Since then this will be the 17th article I have done mentioning Measure W.
Tomorrow, we will have a very special report on the Measure Q oversight committee. I encourage everyone skeptical of that process to read what Bob Schelen has to say.
Today, we are going to take a look at what a number of people and others are saying about Measure W.
The Davis Enterprise has letters from four of the five school board members supporting Measure W. I am not certain if Susan Lovenburg has already submitted a letter, but if she has not, do not read anything into it. She was out at the MU on Monday working hard trying to tell students about Measure W.
Board President Sheila Allen actually posted this on the Vanguard as well, yesterday.
I am going to post her entire post here for those who do not read the comment section.
She directed people to note that she is a strong supporter of neighborhood schools:
“Note especially the last paragraph. I am a firm supporter of neighborhood schools for many reasons that I have publicly presented during School Board meetings for the Valley Oak and the Emerson discussions. Please show your support by Voting Yes on W.”
Here’s the body of her letter:
“We moved to Davis because of the great schools. This is true for our family. I have received many emails from concerned citizens that begin with that very sentence. But, because of an on-going decline in state funding for public education the ability to continue our great programs is at stake.
This year the district cut $1.1 million dollars from the budget and still faced the specter of cutting an additional $2 million in program. With a budget that is over 80% direct student-related personnel, these dollars mean teacher jobs. Last spring hundreds of students, teachers, parents and community members lined up to ask that their program or position would not be cut. Luckily, the Davis Schools Foundation was able to rally the community to temporarily fill the gap for this school year only. Measure W will mean the teachers and our programs will continue for the next 3 years. Measure W means the Davis public schools will continue to be a great place to learn for all of our students.
On November 4 you have the opportunity to provide a solution. Coming to protest in March will not be a solution. The solution to save the teachers and program is now–and it is Measure W! Please vote yes on W.”
Then Gina Daleiden and Tim Taylor:
“Clear and straightforward, if you support science, math, English, foreign language, music, social studies, librarians, athletics, debate, journalism and the teachers who enliven the minds of our next generation, then you support Measure W. The choice is clear.
We are all too aware of the state budget crisis and the impact that has on school funding. Local dollars are needed to maintain our quality programs here in Davis – among the best in the state – because state dollars simply do not.
You may find yourself asking, is the school district running leaner in these trying economic times? Absolutely. DJUSD spends more than 80 percent of our discretionary budget on expenses directly related to classroom instruction – teachers, counselors, principals and para-educators. Of the remaining percentage, we’ve cut $1.1 million, including eliminating one of the top three administrative positions, squeezing site budgets to levels difficult to sustain, and cutting operating costs. Our administrative budget falls in the lowest tier in the state, lower than most school districts, and even lower than many nonprofit organizations.
Despite all of this, the shortfall in funding is over $2 million annually. It is simply not possible to cut these funds without severely impacting the classroom and our kids. Vital programs and teachers will be lost. Our school system, our community and, most importantly, our children will lose.”
Boardmember Richard Harris makes a plea that they need a two-thirds vote:
“To succeed, we need two votes in favor of Measure W for every one vote against it. Unlike the presidential race, where a candidate can win without gaining the most votes nationwide, or the local bond measure for community college facilities that can pass with only 55 percent of the vote, we need a super-majority of two-thirds support to pass Measure W. A simple majority will not be enough to save our schools.
Measure W is a true test of this community’s willingness to take local responsibility in these uncertain economic times for key education programs like science, math, music and libraries.
We’ve reached out to voters during this campaign and we know a majority of voters, and overwhelmingly parents, support investing $10 a month in their community. A clear majority of voters definitely agrees with The Enterprise, the Chamber of Commerce and the Yolo County Taxpayers Association that Measure W is good for the schools and the community.
But there are many more potential voters in households without students attending Davis schools than households with children in the schools.
So parents, now is the time to get out of your comfort zone and go talk to your neighbors who don’t have school-age kids. Tell them about Measure W, emphasize that strong Davis schools make our community strong and Davis a better place to live. Earn their support and then make sure they vote.”
Do not take the word just for the elected members of the school board. A few weeks ago, the Sacramento Bee Endorsed a Yes on Measure W vote, citing: “APPROVING PARCEL TAX WILL PRESERVE A TRADITION OF GOOD SCHOOLS”
They write:
“Voters approved the last four-year parcel tax in November 2007, for $200 per parcel.
Since that 2007 parcel tax passed, however, the state’s budget situation has worsened, and with it the situation in local school districts. The Davis school district faced $2.8 million in cuts this last year. A one-time fundraising effort by the Davis Schools Foundation staved off $1.77 million in cuts, but the district still had to chop $1 million out of the budget.
So now the Davis school board is back, asking voters to add $120 a year to the 2007 parcel tax to avoid program cuts. Measure W would raise $2.4 million a year for the next three years.”
They continue:
“The additional $2.4 million a year would allow the Davis schools to preserve elementary science and music programs; preserve librarians at elementary and secondary schools; preserve class-size reductions for ninth- and 10th-grade English and math; preserve class periods for foreign language, music and physical education; and preserve extracurricular drama, debate, journalism and sports programs.
Measure W does not fund new programs.
If voters do not pass the parcel tax, the school district will have to cut $2.4 million from its budget.”
They discuss a criticism of the parcel tax:
“The main criticism of parcel taxes in general is that because they are a flat fee on every parcel, lower-income households bear a disproportionate share of the burden. Davis mitigates that by making the parcel tax lower on apartments ($50, instead of $120 in Measure W) and by exempting property owners age 65 and older, who fill out a form and return it to the school district.”
Finally:
“Davis residents have a long history of extraordinary support for their schools, and every school in the district performs above state goals on the Academic Performance Index. To continue the tradition of excellence, Davis voters should vote “yes” on Measure W.”
Here are a couple of fliers, in case you have not seen them. The first, is a flier sent out by the Davis Teachers’ Association and I’m not sure where the other one comes from.
—David Greenwald reporting
If you want to learn more about Measure W, read many more reasons to support it, or volunteer to support the Yes campaign, you can go to
http://www.yesw.org
or contact campaign coordinator, Kingsley Melton at (530)554-2548
If you want to learn more about Measure W, read many more reasons to support it, or volunteer to support the Yes campaign, you can go to
http://www.yesw.org
or contact campaign coordinator, Kingsley Melton at (530)554-2548
If you want to learn more about Measure W, read many more reasons to support it, or volunteer to support the Yes campaign, you can go to
http://www.yesw.org
or contact campaign coordinator, Kingsley Melton at (530)554-2548
If you want to learn more about Measure W, read many more reasons to support it, or volunteer to support the Yes campaign, you can go to
http://www.yesw.org
or contact campaign coordinator, Kingsley Melton at (530)554-2548
Today the California Aggie posted their Prop. and Measure endorsements. Yes on W was one of them.
Aggie endorsements
Today the California Aggie posted their Prop. and Measure endorsements. Yes on W was one of them.
Aggie endorsements
Today the California Aggie posted their Prop. and Measure endorsements. Yes on W was one of them.
Aggie endorsements
Today the California Aggie posted their Prop. and Measure endorsements. Yes on W was one of them.
Aggie endorsements
Recent history has demonstrated that our School Board shapes its decisions on a sliding scale principle,i.e. the more political power one has(read level of affluence),the more your interests are protected by the School Board majority. It seems only right that any further financial support to our school system be also based upon a similar principle, both with direct voluntary support and a potential new support instrument based upon property values rather than a parcel tax .
Recent history has demonstrated that our School Board shapes its decisions on a sliding scale principle,i.e. the more political power one has(read level of affluence),the more your interests are protected by the School Board majority. It seems only right that any further financial support to our school system be also based upon a similar principle, both with direct voluntary support and a potential new support instrument based upon property values rather than a parcel tax .
Recent history has demonstrated that our School Board shapes its decisions on a sliding scale principle,i.e. the more political power one has(read level of affluence),the more your interests are protected by the School Board majority. It seems only right that any further financial support to our school system be also based upon a similar principle, both with direct voluntary support and a potential new support instrument based upon property values rather than a parcel tax .
Recent history has demonstrated that our School Board shapes its decisions on a sliding scale principle,i.e. the more political power one has(read level of affluence),the more your interests are protected by the School Board majority. It seems only right that any further financial support to our school system be also based upon a similar principle, both with direct voluntary support and a potential new support instrument based upon property values rather than a parcel tax .
If you want to learn about the reasons wny you should consider voting “No on Measure W” please log on to the following website address:
http://yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
If you want to learn about the reasons wny you should consider voting “No on Measure W” please log on to the following website address:
http://yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
If you want to learn about the reasons wny you should consider voting “No on Measure W” please log on to the following website address:
http://yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
If you want to learn about the reasons wny you should consider voting “No on Measure W” please log on to the following website address:
http://yvm.net/vme/no-on-w
Recent history has demonstrated that our School Board shapes its decisions on a sliding scale principle,i.e. the more political power one has(read level of affluence),the more your interests are protected by the School Board majority. It seems only right that any further financial support to our school system be also based upon a similar principle, both with direct voluntary support and a potential new support instrument based upon property values rather than a parcel tax.
This is a valid point to raise, but it is illegal in California to have a special tax for schools based on the property value.
You can make differential assessments based on property type (apartments versus houses) and based on age (a voluntary exemption for owners 65 and older), but not based on property values.
The current proposed parcel tax is just about the best you can do.
If you find examples of fairer ways that California schools have raised money through these kinds of special taxes, we will all be very interested to check into it.
Recent history has demonstrated that our School Board shapes its decisions on a sliding scale principle,i.e. the more political power one has(read level of affluence),the more your interests are protected by the School Board majority. It seems only right that any further financial support to our school system be also based upon a similar principle, both with direct voluntary support and a potential new support instrument based upon property values rather than a parcel tax.
This is a valid point to raise, but it is illegal in California to have a special tax for schools based on the property value.
You can make differential assessments based on property type (apartments versus houses) and based on age (a voluntary exemption for owners 65 and older), but not based on property values.
The current proposed parcel tax is just about the best you can do.
If you find examples of fairer ways that California schools have raised money through these kinds of special taxes, we will all be very interested to check into it.
Recent history has demonstrated that our School Board shapes its decisions on a sliding scale principle,i.e. the more political power one has(read level of affluence),the more your interests are protected by the School Board majority. It seems only right that any further financial support to our school system be also based upon a similar principle, both with direct voluntary support and a potential new support instrument based upon property values rather than a parcel tax.
This is a valid point to raise, but it is illegal in California to have a special tax for schools based on the property value.
You can make differential assessments based on property type (apartments versus houses) and based on age (a voluntary exemption for owners 65 and older), but not based on property values.
The current proposed parcel tax is just about the best you can do.
If you find examples of fairer ways that California schools have raised money through these kinds of special taxes, we will all be very interested to check into it.
Recent history has demonstrated that our School Board shapes its decisions on a sliding scale principle,i.e. the more political power one has(read level of affluence),the more your interests are protected by the School Board majority. It seems only right that any further financial support to our school system be also based upon a similar principle, both with direct voluntary support and a potential new support instrument based upon property values rather than a parcel tax.
This is a valid point to raise, but it is illegal in California to have a special tax for schools based on the property value.
You can make differential assessments based on property type (apartments versus houses) and based on age (a voluntary exemption for owners 65 and older), but not based on property values.
The current proposed parcel tax is just about the best you can do.
If you find examples of fairer ways that California schools have raised money through these kinds of special taxes, we will all be very interested to check into it.
I have listed many concerns on this blog and elsewhere about the budgeting process/accountability or lack thereof. IMHO they have not been satisfactorily addressed, so I will be voting NO on W.
I have listed many concerns on this blog and elsewhere about the budgeting process/accountability or lack thereof. IMHO they have not been satisfactorily addressed, so I will be voting NO on W.
I have listed many concerns on this blog and elsewhere about the budgeting process/accountability or lack thereof. IMHO they have not been satisfactorily addressed, so I will be voting NO on W.
I have listed many concerns on this blog and elsewhere about the budgeting process/accountability or lack thereof. IMHO they have not been satisfactorily addressed, so I will be voting NO on W.
Of course the Davis Board of Ed wants more money – so they don’t have to do the hard work that would be required to address the problems that have occurred.
Of course the Davis Board of Ed wants more money – so they don’t have to do the hard work that would be required to address the problems that have occurred.
Of course the Davis Board of Ed wants more money – so they don’t have to do the hard work that would be required to address the problems that have occurred.
Of course the Davis Board of Ed wants more money – so they don’t have to do the hard work that would be required to address the problems that have occurred.
Anon: From my perspective the problem of accountability has been addressed here thoroughly to the point of tedium. What other assurance would you like? I will have a story tomorrow, btw, on the measure q oversight committee, I think everyone will find that interesting.
Gimme: What problems have occurred that the board has not addressed?
Anon: From my perspective the problem of accountability has been addressed here thoroughly to the point of tedium. What other assurance would you like? I will have a story tomorrow, btw, on the measure q oversight committee, I think everyone will find that interesting.
Gimme: What problems have occurred that the board has not addressed?
Anon: From my perspective the problem of accountability has been addressed here thoroughly to the point of tedium. What other assurance would you like? I will have a story tomorrow, btw, on the measure q oversight committee, I think everyone will find that interesting.
Gimme: What problems have occurred that the board has not addressed?
Anon: From my perspective the problem of accountability has been addressed here thoroughly to the point of tedium. What other assurance would you like? I will have a story tomorrow, btw, on the measure q oversight committee, I think everyone will find that interesting.
Gimme: What problems have occurred that the board has not addressed?
WDF: “You can make differential assessments based on property type (apartments versus houses) and based on age (a voluntary exemption for owners 65 and older), but not based on property values.”
It is my understanding that assessments can also be made based on square footage of improvements. With that, the owner of a 3,200 s.f. home would pay double what the owner of a 1,600 s.f. house pays. The reason I was told this is not done is because the records of square footage of improvements are incomplete in our county.
P.S. Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this new format for commenets?
WDF: “You can make differential assessments based on property type (apartments versus houses) and based on age (a voluntary exemption for owners 65 and older), but not based on property values.”
It is my understanding that assessments can also be made based on square footage of improvements. With that, the owner of a 3,200 s.f. home would pay double what the owner of a 1,600 s.f. house pays. The reason I was told this is not done is because the records of square footage of improvements are incomplete in our county.
P.S. Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this new format for commenets?
WDF: “You can make differential assessments based on property type (apartments versus houses) and based on age (a voluntary exemption for owners 65 and older), but not based on property values.”
It is my understanding that assessments can also be made based on square footage of improvements. With that, the owner of a 3,200 s.f. home would pay double what the owner of a 1,600 s.f. house pays. The reason I was told this is not done is because the records of square footage of improvements are incomplete in our county.
P.S. Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this new format for commenets?
WDF: “You can make differential assessments based on property type (apartments versus houses) and based on age (a voluntary exemption for owners 65 and older), but not based on property values.”
It is my understanding that assessments can also be made based on square footage of improvements. With that, the owner of a 3,200 s.f. home would pay double what the owner of a 1,600 s.f. house pays. The reason I was told this is not done is because the records of square footage of improvements are incomplete in our county.
P.S. Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this new format for commenets?
1) True accountability, not oversight committee handpicked by School Board
2) More specifics on how money is spent – the school website budget material is almost indecipherable. If you want the public to pony up, then explain in terms the public can understand
3) Unwillingness to listen to community to gain assurance Emerson will not be closed – or at the very least give citizens opportunity to put up funding for nothing else but saving Emerson
4) More transparent budgeting process w better citizen opportunity for input, e.g. Emerson debacle in which it was going to be closed w no public hearings
5) Reasons why/comparison of why Woodland/West Sac are not having the sorts of severe financial problems Davis is – what are they doing right? Perhaps Woodland’s business community has helped the picture, and Davis needs to promote more commercial development. After all, it was local business that did a lot of the bailing out of our schools in this latest funding crisis.
6) Failure to define “core curricula”
7) Use of excuse the funding comes from different pots of money in one instance, then conflating the two when it suits the School District’s purpose
8) Self-serving insensitive statements by Bd members, such as Sheila Allen, who gushed about the first day of school for her children going to Karamatsu as Valley Oak students were siphoned off to other schools. It shows a lack of integrity.
9) Unwillingness of School Bd to consider charter schools as an alternative
10) No move to encourage transfer students from outside the district
11) Overconcern of Harris about “green schools” to further his own political agenda
12) Evidence that at least 1 million dollars was shaved from the budget w/o programs suffering overly much, yet the Bd/District insisted they could not cut anything
13) Insisting programs shouldn’t be cut, while eliminating all programs at Valley Oak w/o a qualm
And the list goes on…
1) True accountability, not oversight committee handpicked by School Board
2) More specifics on how money is spent – the school website budget material is almost indecipherable. If you want the public to pony up, then explain in terms the public can understand
3) Unwillingness to listen to community to gain assurance Emerson will not be closed – or at the very least give citizens opportunity to put up funding for nothing else but saving Emerson
4) More transparent budgeting process w better citizen opportunity for input, e.g. Emerson debacle in which it was going to be closed w no public hearings
5) Reasons why/comparison of why Woodland/West Sac are not having the sorts of severe financial problems Davis is – what are they doing right? Perhaps Woodland’s business community has helped the picture, and Davis needs to promote more commercial development. After all, it was local business that did a lot of the bailing out of our schools in this latest funding crisis.
6) Failure to define “core curricula”
7) Use of excuse the funding comes from different pots of money in one instance, then conflating the two when it suits the School District’s purpose
8) Self-serving insensitive statements by Bd members, such as Sheila Allen, who gushed about the first day of school for her children going to Karamatsu as Valley Oak students were siphoned off to other schools. It shows a lack of integrity.
9) Unwillingness of School Bd to consider charter schools as an alternative
10) No move to encourage transfer students from outside the district
11) Overconcern of Harris about “green schools” to further his own political agenda
12) Evidence that at least 1 million dollars was shaved from the budget w/o programs suffering overly much, yet the Bd/District insisted they could not cut anything
13) Insisting programs shouldn’t be cut, while eliminating all programs at Valley Oak w/o a qualm
And the list goes on…
1) True accountability, not oversight committee handpicked by School Board
2) More specifics on how money is spent – the school website budget material is almost indecipherable. If you want the public to pony up, then explain in terms the public can understand
3) Unwillingness to listen to community to gain assurance Emerson will not be closed – or at the very least give citizens opportunity to put up funding for nothing else but saving Emerson
4) More transparent budgeting process w better citizen opportunity for input, e.g. Emerson debacle in which it was going to be closed w no public hearings
5) Reasons why/comparison of why Woodland/West Sac are not having the sorts of severe financial problems Davis is – what are they doing right? Perhaps Woodland’s business community has helped the picture, and Davis needs to promote more commercial development. After all, it was local business that did a lot of the bailing out of our schools in this latest funding crisis.
6) Failure to define “core curricula”
7) Use of excuse the funding comes from different pots of money in one instance, then conflating the two when it suits the School District’s purpose
8) Self-serving insensitive statements by Bd members, such as Sheila Allen, who gushed about the first day of school for her children going to Karamatsu as Valley Oak students were siphoned off to other schools. It shows a lack of integrity.
9) Unwillingness of School Bd to consider charter schools as an alternative
10) No move to encourage transfer students from outside the district
11) Overconcern of Harris about “green schools” to further his own political agenda
12) Evidence that at least 1 million dollars was shaved from the budget w/o programs suffering overly much, yet the Bd/District insisted they could not cut anything
13) Insisting programs shouldn’t be cut, while eliminating all programs at Valley Oak w/o a qualm
And the list goes on…
1) True accountability, not oversight committee handpicked by School Board
2) More specifics on how money is spent – the school website budget material is almost indecipherable. If you want the public to pony up, then explain in terms the public can understand
3) Unwillingness to listen to community to gain assurance Emerson will not be closed – or at the very least give citizens opportunity to put up funding for nothing else but saving Emerson
4) More transparent budgeting process w better citizen opportunity for input, e.g. Emerson debacle in which it was going to be closed w no public hearings
5) Reasons why/comparison of why Woodland/West Sac are not having the sorts of severe financial problems Davis is – what are they doing right? Perhaps Woodland’s business community has helped the picture, and Davis needs to promote more commercial development. After all, it was local business that did a lot of the bailing out of our schools in this latest funding crisis.
6) Failure to define “core curricula”
7) Use of excuse the funding comes from different pots of money in one instance, then conflating the two when it suits the School District’s purpose
8) Self-serving insensitive statements by Bd members, such as Sheila Allen, who gushed about the first day of school for her children going to Karamatsu as Valley Oak students were siphoned off to other schools. It shows a lack of integrity.
9) Unwillingness of School Bd to consider charter schools as an alternative
10) No move to encourage transfer students from outside the district
11) Overconcern of Harris about “green schools” to further his own political agenda
12) Evidence that at least 1 million dollars was shaved from the budget w/o programs suffering overly much, yet the Bd/District insisted they could not cut anything
13) Insisting programs shouldn’t be cut, while eliminating all programs at Valley Oak w/o a qualm
And the list goes on…
“5) Reasons why/comparison of why Woodland/West Sac are not having the sorts of severe financial problems Davis is – what are they doing right? Perhaps Woodland’s business community has helped the picture, and Davis needs to promote more commercial development. After all, it was local business that did a lot of the bailing out of our schools in this latest funding crisis.”
You don’t watch school board meetings, do you?
This was addressed in several meetings.
“5) Reasons why/comparison of why Woodland/West Sac are not having the sorts of severe financial problems Davis is – what are they doing right? Perhaps Woodland’s business community has helped the picture, and Davis needs to promote more commercial development. After all, it was local business that did a lot of the bailing out of our schools in this latest funding crisis.”
You don’t watch school board meetings, do you?
This was addressed in several meetings.
“5) Reasons why/comparison of why Woodland/West Sac are not having the sorts of severe financial problems Davis is – what are they doing right? Perhaps Woodland’s business community has helped the picture, and Davis needs to promote more commercial development. After all, it was local business that did a lot of the bailing out of our schools in this latest funding crisis.”
You don’t watch school board meetings, do you?
This was addressed in several meetings.
“5) Reasons why/comparison of why Woodland/West Sac are not having the sorts of severe financial problems Davis is – what are they doing right? Perhaps Woodland’s business community has helped the picture, and Davis needs to promote more commercial development. After all, it was local business that did a lot of the bailing out of our schools in this latest funding crisis.”
You don’t watch school board meetings, do you?
This was addressed in several meetings.
“1) True accountability, not oversight committee handpicked by School Board”
Did you indicate your availability to serve on such a committee? You can always ask. If you did and they said “no”, you would begin to have an argument.
We already elect the school board from among local citizens. Why add to cost and bureaucracy by running additional elections?
If you don’t like the school board picks, then vote against them.
“1) True accountability, not oversight committee handpicked by School Board”
Did you indicate your availability to serve on such a committee? You can always ask. If you did and they said “no”, you would begin to have an argument.
We already elect the school board from among local citizens. Why add to cost and bureaucracy by running additional elections?
If you don’t like the school board picks, then vote against them.
“1) True accountability, not oversight committee handpicked by School Board”
Did you indicate your availability to serve on such a committee? You can always ask. If you did and they said “no”, you would begin to have an argument.
We already elect the school board from among local citizens. Why add to cost and bureaucracy by running additional elections?
If you don’t like the school board picks, then vote against them.
“1) True accountability, not oversight committee handpicked by School Board”
Did you indicate your availability to serve on such a committee? You can always ask. If you did and they said “no”, you would begin to have an argument.
We already elect the school board from among local citizens. Why add to cost and bureaucracy by running additional elections?
If you don’t like the school board picks, then vote against them.
“Gimme a Break said…
etc.”
These have all been addressed. Either you’re not listening, or you set standards too high that they will never be met.
I voted for Measure W.
“Gimme a Break said…
etc.”
These have all been addressed. Either you’re not listening, or you set standards too high that they will never be met.
I voted for Measure W.
“Gimme a Break said…
etc.”
These have all been addressed. Either you’re not listening, or you set standards too high that they will never be met.
I voted for Measure W.
“Gimme a Break said…
etc.”
These have all been addressed. Either you’re not listening, or you set standards too high that they will never be met.
I voted for Measure W.
“P.S. Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this new format for commenets?”
I don’t like it. Sometimes I can’t tell if I’m in the comments page or not.
“P.S. Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this new format for commenets?”
I don’t like it. Sometimes I can’t tell if I’m in the comments page or not.
“P.S. Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this new format for commenets?”
I don’t like it. Sometimes I can’t tell if I’m in the comments page or not.
“P.S. Is it just me, or does anyone else dislike this new format for commenets?”
I don’t like it. Sometimes I can’t tell if I’m in the comments page or not.
Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) Endorsement of Measure W:
The YCTA never contacted me: Coleman Thomas “Tom” Randall, Jr who is the Chief Spokesperson Against Measure W to make any kind of presentation against Measure W before them prior to that organization making this endorsement decision to support Measure W.
This inaction may have influenced John Munn’s actions because we had sparred on a few occasions over local Republican Party campaign strategy and had personality as he was a one time the Chair of the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC) and interestingly over the last two (2) years John Munn’s involvement in local Republican Party politics has demished to the point he is no longer active in local Republican Party activities such as non-attendance at gatherings etc.
The President of the Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) John Munn is formerly a Member of the Davis School Board and the YCTA’s decision to influence the YCTA’s endorsement of Measure W was probably widely and unfairly influenced by his previous association as a Member of the Davis School Board. Furthermore, John Munn is a lifelong bureaucrat who has held various positions in state government and could be expected to support the interests of the local school bureucracy by supporting Measure W.
The YCTA has a stated position in that it opposes the circumvention of Proposition 13 the Property Tax Limitation Measure passed by the State’s voters on Tuesday, June 6, 1978 yet in a contradiction it has endorsed Measure W which is an example of a ballot measure that seeks to bypass the intent of Proposition 13 through a legal loophole in the measure and erode the relief from excessive property taxation seeks to provide. This position is listed on the website of this organization that can be viewed at the following website address of: http://www.yolotaxpayers.com
Inappropriate actions undertaken by the Yes on Measure W campaign.
Solicited Meeting by the Yes on Measure W Campaign
After I submitted the ballot argument against Measure W on Friday, August 8th I received a phone and an e-mail message from Gina Daleiden of the Davis School Board solicited a meeting with me regarding the Measure W issue. That meeting was subsequently held at Strings Restaurant in Davis on Wednesday, August 13th.
Gina Daleiden’s actions to arrange this meeting were apparently politically motivated as she used obnoxious “strong arm” tactics and called the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC) Chair Mark Pruner to arrange that meeting that was referred over to the YCRPCC Secretary Gleen Holderreed she is currently an assistant to Yolo County Supervisor Helen Thomson who is also a former State Assembly Member and Davis School Board Member and has a record of endorsements of being among the most pro tax raising politicians locally.
To the contrary, Gina has a son whom is active in Republican Party politics locally by serving in a local High School club before he graduated.
Furthermore, Gina (Surkala) Daleiden comes from a background in which both her parents were public employees working as Teachers in local school districts and joined that profession herself and is a 1985 graduate of Davis High School and therefore has an extreme bias towards the local educational bureaucracy’s interests ahead of most of the voters of the DJUSD and therefore her actions were inappropriate in seeking this meeting as opposing sides on an issue don’t usually schedule informal meetings with their opposition and the only time they meet is by chance or at public forums.
Also, Gina and I were graduates of Davis High School the same year in 1985 and she apparently believed that she could discourage my actions because she thought that just because I was in the same years graduating class that she would likely have a greater influence over me to control my actions. Interesting Helen Thomson’s daughter Morag was a graduate of that same years class as well. I never knew Gina personally well back then although I knew she had not yet become politically active back in those High School years of 1982-85. I did serve for a year as an alternate Student Representative to the Davis School Board from 1983-84.
The meeting was organized ny Glenn Holderreed who is currently the Secretary of the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC). Who is currently a signer of the “Yes on Measure W” ballot argument which was improper action for him to be undertaking since he served as the moderator for this meeting and had arranged it and therefore should act publicly neutral in regards to expressing his position on this ballot measure.
I did not request or arrange this meeting. It was Davis School Board Member Gina Daleiden who did out of an apparent act of “disguised manipulative arrogance” on behalf of the Davis School Board.
Davis High School (DHS) Hall of Fame Dinner
Also, representatives from the Yes on Measure W campaign attended the First Annual Davis High School Hall of Fame Awards ceremony and in an act of inappropriate arrogance circulated campaign material (interestingly in Blue and White which are the official colors of Davis High School) at that event which was not intended to be conducted as a political event to solicit support from Measure W there. Furthermore, Bob Dunning the local Davis Enterprise columnist wrote his daily column in the Davis Enterprise on Sunday, October 12th about this event and why it was a reason to Support Measure W. Some events are not appropriate venues to be conducting political campaign activity and this event is one such example because it is not meant to be a political type of an event just like a class reunion, teacher retirement party etc.
Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) Endorsement of Measure W:
The YCTA never contacted me: Coleman Thomas “Tom” Randall, Jr who is the Chief Spokesperson Against Measure W to make any kind of presentation against Measure W before them prior to that organization making this endorsement decision to support Measure W.
This inaction may have influenced John Munn’s actions because we had sparred on a few occasions over local Republican Party campaign strategy and had personality as he was a one time the Chair of the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC) and interestingly over the last two (2) years John Munn’s involvement in local Republican Party politics has demished to the point he is no longer active in local Republican Party activities such as non-attendance at gatherings etc.
The President of the Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) John Munn is formerly a Member of the Davis School Board and the YCTA’s decision to influence the YCTA’s endorsement of Measure W was probably widely and unfairly influenced by his previous association as a Member of the Davis School Board. Furthermore, John Munn is a lifelong bureaucrat who has held various positions in state government and could be expected to support the interests of the local school bureucracy by supporting Measure W.
The YCTA has a stated position in that it opposes the circumvention of Proposition 13 the Property Tax Limitation Measure passed by the State’s voters on Tuesday, June 6, 1978 yet in a contradiction it has endorsed Measure W which is an example of a ballot measure that seeks to bypass the intent of Proposition 13 through a legal loophole in the measure and erode the relief from excessive property taxation seeks to provide. This position is listed on the website of this organization that can be viewed at the following website address of: http://www.yolotaxpayers.com
Inappropriate actions undertaken by the Yes on Measure W campaign.
Solicited Meeting by the Yes on Measure W Campaign
After I submitted the ballot argument against Measure W on Friday, August 8th I received a phone and an e-mail message from Gina Daleiden of the Davis School Board solicited a meeting with me regarding the Measure W issue. That meeting was subsequently held at Strings Restaurant in Davis on Wednesday, August 13th.
Gina Daleiden’s actions to arrange this meeting were apparently politically motivated as she used obnoxious “strong arm” tactics and called the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC) Chair Mark Pruner to arrange that meeting that was referred over to the YCRPCC Secretary Gleen Holderreed she is currently an assistant to Yolo County Supervisor Helen Thomson who is also a former State Assembly Member and Davis School Board Member and has a record of endorsements of being among the most pro tax raising politicians locally.
To the contrary, Gina has a son whom is active in Republican Party politics locally by serving in a local High School club before he graduated.
Furthermore, Gina (Surkala) Daleiden comes from a background in which both her parents were public employees working as Teachers in local school districts and joined that profession herself and is a 1985 graduate of Davis High School and therefore has an extreme bias towards the local educational bureaucracy’s interests ahead of most of the voters of the DJUSD and therefore her actions were inappropriate in seeking this meeting as opposing sides on an issue don’t usually schedule informal meetings with their opposition and the only time they meet is by chance or at public forums.
Also, Gina and I were graduates of Davis High School the same year in 1985 and she apparently believed that she could discourage my actions because she thought that just because I was in the same years graduating class that she would likely have a greater influence over me to control my actions. Interesting Helen Thomson’s daughter Morag was a graduate of that same years class as well. I never knew Gina personally well back then although I knew she had not yet become politically active back in those High School years of 1982-85. I did serve for a year as an alternate Student Representative to the Davis School Board from 1983-84.
The meeting was organized ny Glenn Holderreed who is currently the Secretary of the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC). Who is currently a signer of the “Yes on Measure W” ballot argument which was improper action for him to be undertaking since he served as the moderator for this meeting and had arranged it and therefore should act publicly neutral in regards to expressing his position on this ballot measure.
I did not request or arrange this meeting. It was Davis School Board Member Gina Daleiden who did out of an apparent act of “disguised manipulative arrogance” on behalf of the Davis School Board.
Davis High School (DHS) Hall of Fame Dinner
Also, representatives from the Yes on Measure W campaign attended the First Annual Davis High School Hall of Fame Awards ceremony and in an act of inappropriate arrogance circulated campaign material (interestingly in Blue and White which are the official colors of Davis High School) at that event which was not intended to be conducted as a political event to solicit support from Measure W there. Furthermore, Bob Dunning the local Davis Enterprise columnist wrote his daily column in the Davis Enterprise on Sunday, October 12th about this event and why it was a reason to Support Measure W. Some events are not appropriate venues to be conducting political campaign activity and this event is one such example because it is not meant to be a political type of an event just like a class reunion, teacher retirement party etc.
Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) Endorsement of Measure W:
The YCTA never contacted me: Coleman Thomas “Tom” Randall, Jr who is the Chief Spokesperson Against Measure W to make any kind of presentation against Measure W before them prior to that organization making this endorsement decision to support Measure W.
This inaction may have influenced John Munn’s actions because we had sparred on a few occasions over local Republican Party campaign strategy and had personality as he was a one time the Chair of the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC) and interestingly over the last two (2) years John Munn’s involvement in local Republican Party politics has demished to the point he is no longer active in local Republican Party activities such as non-attendance at gatherings etc.
The President of the Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) John Munn is formerly a Member of the Davis School Board and the YCTA’s decision to influence the YCTA’s endorsement of Measure W was probably widely and unfairly influenced by his previous association as a Member of the Davis School Board. Furthermore, John Munn is a lifelong bureaucrat who has held various positions in state government and could be expected to support the interests of the local school bureucracy by supporting Measure W.
The YCTA has a stated position in that it opposes the circumvention of Proposition 13 the Property Tax Limitation Measure passed by the State’s voters on Tuesday, June 6, 1978 yet in a contradiction it has endorsed Measure W which is an example of a ballot measure that seeks to bypass the intent of Proposition 13 through a legal loophole in the measure and erode the relief from excessive property taxation seeks to provide. This position is listed on the website of this organization that can be viewed at the following website address of: http://www.yolotaxpayers.com
Inappropriate actions undertaken by the Yes on Measure W campaign.
Solicited Meeting by the Yes on Measure W Campaign
After I submitted the ballot argument against Measure W on Friday, August 8th I received a phone and an e-mail message from Gina Daleiden of the Davis School Board solicited a meeting with me regarding the Measure W issue. That meeting was subsequently held at Strings Restaurant in Davis on Wednesday, August 13th.
Gina Daleiden’s actions to arrange this meeting were apparently politically motivated as she used obnoxious “strong arm” tactics and called the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC) Chair Mark Pruner to arrange that meeting that was referred over to the YCRPCC Secretary Gleen Holderreed she is currently an assistant to Yolo County Supervisor Helen Thomson who is also a former State Assembly Member and Davis School Board Member and has a record of endorsements of being among the most pro tax raising politicians locally.
To the contrary, Gina has a son whom is active in Republican Party politics locally by serving in a local High School club before he graduated.
Furthermore, Gina (Surkala) Daleiden comes from a background in which both her parents were public employees working as Teachers in local school districts and joined that profession herself and is a 1985 graduate of Davis High School and therefore has an extreme bias towards the local educational bureaucracy’s interests ahead of most of the voters of the DJUSD and therefore her actions were inappropriate in seeking this meeting as opposing sides on an issue don’t usually schedule informal meetings with their opposition and the only time they meet is by chance or at public forums.
Also, Gina and I were graduates of Davis High School the same year in 1985 and she apparently believed that she could discourage my actions because she thought that just because I was in the same years graduating class that she would likely have a greater influence over me to control my actions. Interesting Helen Thomson’s daughter Morag was a graduate of that same years class as well. I never knew Gina personally well back then although I knew she had not yet become politically active back in those High School years of 1982-85. I did serve for a year as an alternate Student Representative to the Davis School Board from 1983-84.
The meeting was organized ny Glenn Holderreed who is currently the Secretary of the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC). Who is currently a signer of the “Yes on Measure W” ballot argument which was improper action for him to be undertaking since he served as the moderator for this meeting and had arranged it and therefore should act publicly neutral in regards to expressing his position on this ballot measure.
I did not request or arrange this meeting. It was Davis School Board Member Gina Daleiden who did out of an apparent act of “disguised manipulative arrogance” on behalf of the Davis School Board.
Davis High School (DHS) Hall of Fame Dinner
Also, representatives from the Yes on Measure W campaign attended the First Annual Davis High School Hall of Fame Awards ceremony and in an act of inappropriate arrogance circulated campaign material (interestingly in Blue and White which are the official colors of Davis High School) at that event which was not intended to be conducted as a political event to solicit support from Measure W there. Furthermore, Bob Dunning the local Davis Enterprise columnist wrote his daily column in the Davis Enterprise on Sunday, October 12th about this event and why it was a reason to Support Measure W. Some events are not appropriate venues to be conducting political campaign activity and this event is one such example because it is not meant to be a political type of an event just like a class reunion, teacher retirement party etc.
Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) Endorsement of Measure W:
The YCTA never contacted me: Coleman Thomas “Tom” Randall, Jr who is the Chief Spokesperson Against Measure W to make any kind of presentation against Measure W before them prior to that organization making this endorsement decision to support Measure W.
This inaction may have influenced John Munn’s actions because we had sparred on a few occasions over local Republican Party campaign strategy and had personality as he was a one time the Chair of the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC) and interestingly over the last two (2) years John Munn’s involvement in local Republican Party politics has demished to the point he is no longer active in local Republican Party activities such as non-attendance at gatherings etc.
The President of the Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) John Munn is formerly a Member of the Davis School Board and the YCTA’s decision to influence the YCTA’s endorsement of Measure W was probably widely and unfairly influenced by his previous association as a Member of the Davis School Board. Furthermore, John Munn is a lifelong bureaucrat who has held various positions in state government and could be expected to support the interests of the local school bureucracy by supporting Measure W.
The YCTA has a stated position in that it opposes the circumvention of Proposition 13 the Property Tax Limitation Measure passed by the State’s voters on Tuesday, June 6, 1978 yet in a contradiction it has endorsed Measure W which is an example of a ballot measure that seeks to bypass the intent of Proposition 13 through a legal loophole in the measure and erode the relief from excessive property taxation seeks to provide. This position is listed on the website of this organization that can be viewed at the following website address of: http://www.yolotaxpayers.com
Inappropriate actions undertaken by the Yes on Measure W campaign.
Solicited Meeting by the Yes on Measure W Campaign
After I submitted the ballot argument against Measure W on Friday, August 8th I received a phone and an e-mail message from Gina Daleiden of the Davis School Board solicited a meeting with me regarding the Measure W issue. That meeting was subsequently held at Strings Restaurant in Davis on Wednesday, August 13th.
Gina Daleiden’s actions to arrange this meeting were apparently politically motivated as she used obnoxious “strong arm” tactics and called the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC) Chair Mark Pruner to arrange that meeting that was referred over to the YCRPCC Secretary Gleen Holderreed she is currently an assistant to Yolo County Supervisor Helen Thomson who is also a former State Assembly Member and Davis School Board Member and has a record of endorsements of being among the most pro tax raising politicians locally.
To the contrary, Gina has a son whom is active in Republican Party politics locally by serving in a local High School club before he graduated.
Furthermore, Gina (Surkala) Daleiden comes from a background in which both her parents were public employees working as Teachers in local school districts and joined that profession herself and is a 1985 graduate of Davis High School and therefore has an extreme bias towards the local educational bureaucracy’s interests ahead of most of the voters of the DJUSD and therefore her actions were inappropriate in seeking this meeting as opposing sides on an issue don’t usually schedule informal meetings with their opposition and the only time they meet is by chance or at public forums.
Also, Gina and I were graduates of Davis High School the same year in 1985 and she apparently believed that she could discourage my actions because she thought that just because I was in the same years graduating class that she would likely have a greater influence over me to control my actions. Interesting Helen Thomson’s daughter Morag was a graduate of that same years class as well. I never knew Gina personally well back then although I knew she had not yet become politically active back in those High School years of 1982-85. I did serve for a year as an alternate Student Representative to the Davis School Board from 1983-84.
The meeting was organized ny Glenn Holderreed who is currently the Secretary of the Yolo County Republican Party Central Committee (YCRPCC). Who is currently a signer of the “Yes on Measure W” ballot argument which was improper action for him to be undertaking since he served as the moderator for this meeting and had arranged it and therefore should act publicly neutral in regards to expressing his position on this ballot measure.
I did not request or arrange this meeting. It was Davis School Board Member Gina Daleiden who did out of an apparent act of “disguised manipulative arrogance” on behalf of the Davis School Board.
Davis High School (DHS) Hall of Fame Dinner
Also, representatives from the Yes on Measure W campaign attended the First Annual Davis High School Hall of Fame Awards ceremony and in an act of inappropriate arrogance circulated campaign material (interestingly in Blue and White which are the official colors of Davis High School) at that event which was not intended to be conducted as a political event to solicit support from Measure W there. Furthermore, Bob Dunning the local Davis Enterprise columnist wrote his daily column in the Davis Enterprise on Sunday, October 12th about this event and why it was a reason to Support Measure W. Some events are not appropriate venues to be conducting political campaign activity and this event is one such example because it is not meant to be a political type of an event just like a class reunion, teacher retirement party etc.
Thomas Randall, Jr said…
Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) Endorsement of Measure W:
etc.
Oh, boy. It’s the season for re-runs!
Thomas Randall, Jr said…
Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) Endorsement of Measure W:
etc.
Oh, boy. It’s the season for re-runs!
Thomas Randall, Jr said…
Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) Endorsement of Measure W:
etc.
Oh, boy. It’s the season for re-runs!
Thomas Randall, Jr said…
Yolo County Taxpayers Association (YCTA) Endorsement of Measure W:
etc.
Oh, boy. It’s the season for re-runs!
Mr. C said:
Also, representatives from the Yes on Measure W campaign attended the First Annual Davis High School Hall of Fame Awards ceremony and in an act of inappropriate arrogance circulated campaign material (interestingly in Blue and White which are the official colors of Davis High School) at that event which was not intended to be conducted as a political event to solicit support from Measure W there. Furthermore, Bob Dunning the local Davis Enterprise columnist wrote his daily column in the Davis Enterprise on Sunday, October 12th about this event and why it was a reason to Support Measure W. Some events are not appropriate venues to be conducting political campaign activity and this event is one such example because it is not meant to be a political type of an event just like a class reunion, teacher retirement party etc.”
The purpose of the Blue and White Foundation is to support Davis schools (or more to the point, DHS). The alumni being honored came from DHS programs that are clearly supported by Measure W. I think most guests there have tremendous pride in DHS, its teachers, and the programs. As far as I know, tax dollars were not spent to put on the event.
Bob Dunning, the honorees, and everyone there are free to speak their minds.
How is a neutral observor supposed to be outraged, here?
Are you running out of substantive things to discuss about the issue at hand?
Mr. C said:
Also, representatives from the Yes on Measure W campaign attended the First Annual Davis High School Hall of Fame Awards ceremony and in an act of inappropriate arrogance circulated campaign material (interestingly in Blue and White which are the official colors of Davis High School) at that event which was not intended to be conducted as a political event to solicit support from Measure W there. Furthermore, Bob Dunning the local Davis Enterprise columnist wrote his daily column in the Davis Enterprise on Sunday, October 12th about this event and why it was a reason to Support Measure W. Some events are not appropriate venues to be conducting political campaign activity and this event is one such example because it is not meant to be a political type of an event just like a class reunion, teacher retirement party etc.”
The purpose of the Blue and White Foundation is to support Davis schools (or more to the point, DHS). The alumni being honored came from DHS programs that are clearly supported by Measure W. I think most guests there have tremendous pride in DHS, its teachers, and the programs. As far as I know, tax dollars were not spent to put on the event.
Bob Dunning, the honorees, and everyone there are free to speak their minds.
How is a neutral observor supposed to be outraged, here?
Are you running out of substantive things to discuss about the issue at hand?
Mr. C said:
Also, representatives from the Yes on Measure W campaign attended the First Annual Davis High School Hall of Fame Awards ceremony and in an act of inappropriate arrogance circulated campaign material (interestingly in Blue and White which are the official colors of Davis High School) at that event which was not intended to be conducted as a political event to solicit support from Measure W there. Furthermore, Bob Dunning the local Davis Enterprise columnist wrote his daily column in the Davis Enterprise on Sunday, October 12th about this event and why it was a reason to Support Measure W. Some events are not appropriate venues to be conducting political campaign activity and this event is one such example because it is not meant to be a political type of an event just like a class reunion, teacher retirement party etc.”
The purpose of the Blue and White Foundation is to support Davis schools (or more to the point, DHS). The alumni being honored came from DHS programs that are clearly supported by Measure W. I think most guests there have tremendous pride in DHS, its teachers, and the programs. As far as I know, tax dollars were not spent to put on the event.
Bob Dunning, the honorees, and everyone there are free to speak their minds.
How is a neutral observor supposed to be outraged, here?
Are you running out of substantive things to discuss about the issue at hand?
Mr. C said:
Also, representatives from the Yes on Measure W campaign attended the First Annual Davis High School Hall of Fame Awards ceremony and in an act of inappropriate arrogance circulated campaign material (interestingly in Blue and White which are the official colors of Davis High School) at that event which was not intended to be conducted as a political event to solicit support from Measure W there. Furthermore, Bob Dunning the local Davis Enterprise columnist wrote his daily column in the Davis Enterprise on Sunday, October 12th about this event and why it was a reason to Support Measure W. Some events are not appropriate venues to be conducting political campaign activity and this event is one such example because it is not meant to be a political type of an event just like a class reunion, teacher retirement party etc.”
The purpose of the Blue and White Foundation is to support Davis schools (or more to the point, DHS). The alumni being honored came from DHS programs that are clearly supported by Measure W. I think most guests there have tremendous pride in DHS, its teachers, and the programs. As far as I know, tax dollars were not spent to put on the event.
Bob Dunning, the honorees, and everyone there are free to speak their minds.
How is a neutral observor supposed to be outraged, here?
Are you running out of substantive things to discuss about the issue at hand?
Because a political campaign attended this event and cicrculated campaign material in favor of one side vs. the other regarding a ballot measure it has the potential of creating a different public perception of this event from it;s intention of serving as a non-political type event into one that serves a political purpose. Over time if this activity were to continue at this Annual event opposing sides could show up and circulate their materials there and then pretty soon the event becomes broiled into contreversy and its reputation could be undermined taking on the charichter of being a political rally instead.
The situation is also unfair because many honorees and attendees have attended that event because they rightfully percieve it with the expectation as it should be as a non-political event to Honor Distinguished Graduates of Davis Senior High School but instead are unexpectedly confronted with the aspect that the event was being used to support a political purpose such as the Yes on Measure W campaign.
Also, even though Measure W would raise money to support the Schools if it passes it is a ballot Measure subject to the casting of opposing Yes and No votes regarding it and the tax it would impose is not voluntary in regard to being paid unlike non-political voluntary fundrasing campaigns conducted by the Davis Schools Foundation and Blue and White Foundation.
Also, what Bob Dunning did in this regard of serving as the events Emcee and then connecting this event to advocate support for a ballot measure in an article I thought was unprofessional and showed a lack of objective journalism by arguing that this event served a political purpose when the intention of holding it was not to as the honorees there weren’t being given awards for their political views but their achievements.
Unfortunately, Bob Dunning seems to consistantly and always is unobjectively supportive of the local Davis School District establishment which I find objectionable because he seems to lack objectivity and takes an mindless follow-the-crowd attitude on such matters.
Because a political campaign attended this event and cicrculated campaign material in favor of one side vs. the other regarding a ballot measure it has the potential of creating a different public perception of this event from it;s intention of serving as a non-political type event into one that serves a political purpose. Over time if this activity were to continue at this Annual event opposing sides could show up and circulate their materials there and then pretty soon the event becomes broiled into contreversy and its reputation could be undermined taking on the charichter of being a political rally instead.
The situation is also unfair because many honorees and attendees have attended that event because they rightfully percieve it with the expectation as it should be as a non-political event to Honor Distinguished Graduates of Davis Senior High School but instead are unexpectedly confronted with the aspect that the event was being used to support a political purpose such as the Yes on Measure W campaign.
Also, even though Measure W would raise money to support the Schools if it passes it is a ballot Measure subject to the casting of opposing Yes and No votes regarding it and the tax it would impose is not voluntary in regard to being paid unlike non-political voluntary fundrasing campaigns conducted by the Davis Schools Foundation and Blue and White Foundation.
Also, what Bob Dunning did in this regard of serving as the events Emcee and then connecting this event to advocate support for a ballot measure in an article I thought was unprofessional and showed a lack of objective journalism by arguing that this event served a political purpose when the intention of holding it was not to as the honorees there weren’t being given awards for their political views but their achievements.
Unfortunately, Bob Dunning seems to consistantly and always is unobjectively supportive of the local Davis School District establishment which I find objectionable because he seems to lack objectivity and takes an mindless follow-the-crowd attitude on such matters.
Because a political campaign attended this event and cicrculated campaign material in favor of one side vs. the other regarding a ballot measure it has the potential of creating a different public perception of this event from it;s intention of serving as a non-political type event into one that serves a political purpose. Over time if this activity were to continue at this Annual event opposing sides could show up and circulate their materials there and then pretty soon the event becomes broiled into contreversy and its reputation could be undermined taking on the charichter of being a political rally instead.
The situation is also unfair because many honorees and attendees have attended that event because they rightfully percieve it with the expectation as it should be as a non-political event to Honor Distinguished Graduates of Davis Senior High School but instead are unexpectedly confronted with the aspect that the event was being used to support a political purpose such as the Yes on Measure W campaign.
Also, even though Measure W would raise money to support the Schools if it passes it is a ballot Measure subject to the casting of opposing Yes and No votes regarding it and the tax it would impose is not voluntary in regard to being paid unlike non-political voluntary fundrasing campaigns conducted by the Davis Schools Foundation and Blue and White Foundation.
Also, what Bob Dunning did in this regard of serving as the events Emcee and then connecting this event to advocate support for a ballot measure in an article I thought was unprofessional and showed a lack of objective journalism by arguing that this event served a political purpose when the intention of holding it was not to as the honorees there weren’t being given awards for their political views but their achievements.
Unfortunately, Bob Dunning seems to consistantly and always is unobjectively supportive of the local Davis School District establishment which I find objectionable because he seems to lack objectivity and takes an mindless follow-the-crowd attitude on such matters.
Because a political campaign attended this event and cicrculated campaign material in favor of one side vs. the other regarding a ballot measure it has the potential of creating a different public perception of this event from it;s intention of serving as a non-political type event into one that serves a political purpose. Over time if this activity were to continue at this Annual event opposing sides could show up and circulate their materials there and then pretty soon the event becomes broiled into contreversy and its reputation could be undermined taking on the charichter of being a political rally instead.
The situation is also unfair because many honorees and attendees have attended that event because they rightfully percieve it with the expectation as it should be as a non-political event to Honor Distinguished Graduates of Davis Senior High School but instead are unexpectedly confronted with the aspect that the event was being used to support a political purpose such as the Yes on Measure W campaign.
Also, even though Measure W would raise money to support the Schools if it passes it is a ballot Measure subject to the casting of opposing Yes and No votes regarding it and the tax it would impose is not voluntary in regard to being paid unlike non-political voluntary fundrasing campaigns conducted by the Davis Schools Foundation and Blue and White Foundation.
Also, what Bob Dunning did in this regard of serving as the events Emcee and then connecting this event to advocate support for a ballot measure in an article I thought was unprofessional and showed a lack of objective journalism by arguing that this event served a political purpose when the intention of holding it was not to as the honorees there weren’t being given awards for their political views but their achievements.
Unfortunately, Bob Dunning seems to consistantly and always is unobjectively supportive of the local Davis School District establishment which I find objectionable because he seems to lack objectivity and takes an mindless follow-the-crowd attitude on such matters.
“I did serve for a year as an alternate Student Representative to the Davis School Board from 1983-84.”
So what do you think of the Davis schools now compared to when you were a student?
Have things improved? Worsened?
“I did serve for a year as an alternate Student Representative to the Davis School Board from 1983-84.”
So what do you think of the Davis schools now compared to when you were a student?
Have things improved? Worsened?
“I did serve for a year as an alternate Student Representative to the Davis School Board from 1983-84.”
So what do you think of the Davis schools now compared to when you were a student?
Have things improved? Worsened?
“I did serve for a year as an alternate Student Representative to the Davis School Board from 1983-84.”
So what do you think of the Davis schools now compared to when you were a student?
Have things improved? Worsened?
“It is my understanding that assessments can also be made based on square footage of improvements. With that, the owner of a 3,200 s.f. home would pay double what the owner of a 1,600 s.f. house pays. The reason I was told this is not done is because the records of square footage of improvements are incomplete in our county.”
Are there places where that has been done successfully?
“It is my understanding that assessments can also be made based on square footage of improvements. With that, the owner of a 3,200 s.f. home would pay double what the owner of a 1,600 s.f. house pays. The reason I was told this is not done is because the records of square footage of improvements are incomplete in our county.”
Are there places where that has been done successfully?
“It is my understanding that assessments can also be made based on square footage of improvements. With that, the owner of a 3,200 s.f. home would pay double what the owner of a 1,600 s.f. house pays. The reason I was told this is not done is because the records of square footage of improvements are incomplete in our county.”
Are there places where that has been done successfully?
“It is my understanding that assessments can also be made based on square footage of improvements. With that, the owner of a 3,200 s.f. home would pay double what the owner of a 1,600 s.f. house pays. The reason I was told this is not done is because the records of square footage of improvements are incomplete in our county.”
Are there places where that has been done successfully?
“Are there places where that has been done successfully?”
I don’t know. The only reason I know that is an option is because when a previous parcel tax came up for a vote, Suzy Boyd, who was then mayor, told me she would prefer to use square footage, but informed me the records make that impossible, here. Maybe it is impossible in all counties in California for the same reason.
“Are there places where that has been done successfully?”
I don’t know. The only reason I know that is an option is because when a previous parcel tax came up for a vote, Suzy Boyd, who was then mayor, told me she would prefer to use square footage, but informed me the records make that impossible, here. Maybe it is impossible in all counties in California for the same reason.
“Are there places where that has been done successfully?”
I don’t know. The only reason I know that is an option is because when a previous parcel tax came up for a vote, Suzy Boyd, who was then mayor, told me she would prefer to use square footage, but informed me the records make that impossible, here. Maybe it is impossible in all counties in California for the same reason.
“Are there places where that has been done successfully?”
I don’t know. The only reason I know that is an option is because when a previous parcel tax came up for a vote, Suzy Boyd, who was then mayor, told me she would prefer to use square footage, but informed me the records make that impossible, here. Maybe it is impossible in all counties in California for the same reason.
“10) No move to encourage transfer students from outside the district”
I thought earlier you were criticizing the district because they had more students than last year. Do you suppose that is because the district did more to encourage transfer students from outside the district?
“10) No move to encourage transfer students from outside the district”
I thought earlier you were criticizing the district because they had more students than last year. Do you suppose that is because the district did more to encourage transfer students from outside the district?
“10) No move to encourage transfer students from outside the district”
I thought earlier you were criticizing the district because they had more students than last year. Do you suppose that is because the district did more to encourage transfer students from outside the district?
“10) No move to encourage transfer students from outside the district”
I thought earlier you were criticizing the district because they had more students than last year. Do you suppose that is because the district did more to encourage transfer students from outside the district?
Re: 3) Unwillingness to listen to community to gain assurance Emerson will not be closed – or at the very least give citizens opportunity to put up funding for nothing else but saving Emerson
I like Emerson, too. But a tax that will do “nothing else but save Emerson” would lose. While this is the number one issue for West Davis, it is not in the rest of the city. There’s no way we would get a two-thirds vote for a tax to keep Emerson open. If you care about Emerson, Measure W is the next best thing.
Re: 3) Unwillingness to listen to community to gain assurance Emerson will not be closed – or at the very least give citizens opportunity to put up funding for nothing else but saving Emerson
I like Emerson, too. But a tax that will do “nothing else but save Emerson” would lose. While this is the number one issue for West Davis, it is not in the rest of the city. There’s no way we would get a two-thirds vote for a tax to keep Emerson open. If you care about Emerson, Measure W is the next best thing.
Re: 3) Unwillingness to listen to community to gain assurance Emerson will not be closed – or at the very least give citizens opportunity to put up funding for nothing else but saving Emerson
I like Emerson, too. But a tax that will do “nothing else but save Emerson” would lose. While this is the number one issue for West Davis, it is not in the rest of the city. There’s no way we would get a two-thirds vote for a tax to keep Emerson open. If you care about Emerson, Measure W is the next best thing.
Re: 3) Unwillingness to listen to community to gain assurance Emerson will not be closed – or at the very least give citizens opportunity to put up funding for nothing else but saving Emerson
I like Emerson, too. But a tax that will do “nothing else but save Emerson” would lose. While this is the number one issue for West Davis, it is not in the rest of the city. There’s no way we would get a two-thirds vote for a tax to keep Emerson open. If you care about Emerson, Measure W is the next best thing.