- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Susan Deacon: School Funding the State Can’t Take Away
June 5 will be a critical day for local schools. Voters will decide whether to save the locally funded music, arts, math, science and technology programs that our community put in place four years ago.

While the Santa Barbara Unified School District has faced horrible cuts to our general budget during the economic downturn, one bright spot has been the continuation of electives and enrichment courses that many other districts across the state axed long ago. Local revenue from parcel taxes that voters approved in 2008 has kept class sizes smaller, provided music teachers in all of our elementary schools, funded foreign language classes, and provided critical equipment such as computers and microscopes to our students.
But these parcel taxes will expire at the end of the next school year. As a result, the school board has placed Measure W for junior high and high schools and Measure X for Santa Barbara elementary schools before the voters. These measures will deliver $16 million over four years to our students and our classrooms, and will keep critical programs alive.
District resources cannot be used to campaign for the measures, but school board members and staff can explain the reasoning behind placing the parcel taxes on the ballot.
In researching the decision to renew the parcel taxes, the school board asked the public to weigh in on priorities. As a result, the secondary schools measure (W) will also now support career/technical courses that are key to giving junior high and high school students 21st-century job skills. Such skills ensure students can compete in today’s job market. Programs such as automotive technology, engineering, business and finance, computer science, culinary arts, construction, media arts and health science cannot thrive or reach our whole student population without funding.
The parcel taxes come with strict restrictions: None of the money can be used for administrative salaries; citizen oversight committees must monitor spending; senior citizens may claim an exemption for their home; and the measures will once again expire in four years.
Each tax is $54 a year. Our elementary and secondary districts unified last year, but the elementary and secondary boundaries are honored when the taxes are levied. All residents residing from Montecito to Goleta will vote for Measure W; if you live in the city of Santa Barbara you will also be voting on Measure X, and would pay for each measure. To pass, these measures will require a two-thirds majority vote. It is a steep hill to climb.
It is hard for school districts to predict the future of the bulk of our funding, which comes from the state. We can thank folks in Sacramento for a funding model that is as dysfunctional as it gets (even experts have trouble wrapping their heads around the process). California ranks 47th in the nation in per-pupil spending.
It has been almost four years since I joined the Santa Barbara Board of Education. When people ask me how it’s going, I often respond, “I’ve become an expert at budget cutting.” During this time we’ve cut more than $20 million from our general fund. The vast majority of this fund is dedicated to human resources: teachers, nurses, custodians, clerical workers and principals. These are the folks who get up every day to make sure our children come to safe classrooms, filled with excitement and learning.
Our district has worked hard to mitigate the damage of state cuts, and we have used every resource to find stable funding for our schools. The generosity of our community, combined with sacrifices by our staff, helps keep vital programs and personnel. But because of state cuts, our staff will face seven furlough days in the next school year — representing a significant pay cut — and our students will have five fewer days of class. Unthinkable, really, but true. The district may be able to rescind at least some of the furloughs pending statewide voter action come November, but this is something over which we have little control.
But we do have control of revenues raised locally. The Santa Barbara Education Foundation is spearheading the campaign to pass the parcel taxes, and community leaders, business organizations and people from all walks of life and political perspectives have come together to support the measures. Only local money, like the parcel taxes, is guaranteed funding for our schools. This is one way our community can have a voice. This is one way we can decide what is best for our students.
— Susan Deacon is president of the Santa Barbara Unified School District Board of Education.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use
» on 05.17.12 @ 09:09 PM
The local CTE programs really deserve our support. The teachers work so hard, in spite of having to continually swim upstream, always in danger of being swept aside by politics. The L.A. Unified District is curtailing all electives so students can all be prepared for the university. What are these people thinking?
Here is a recent article from Time Magazine that is worthy of your time:
TIME MAGAZINE
Monday, May. 14, 2012
As Arizona goes, so goes the nation?
Vocational education used to be where you sent the dumb kids or the supposed misfits who weren’t suited for classroom learning. It began to fall out of fashion about 40 years ago, in part because it became a civil rights issue: voc-ed was seen as a form of segregation, a convenient dumping ground for minority kids in Northern cities … the education establishment’s response to the voc-ed problem only made things worse.
Over time, it morphed into the theology that every child should go to college (a four-year liberal-arts college at that) and therefore every child should be required to pursue a college-prep course in high school.
The results have been awful. High school dropout rates continue to be a national embarrassment. And most high school graduates are not prepared for the world of work. The unemployment rate for recent high school graduates who are not in school is a stratospheric 33%. The results for even those who go on to higher education are brutal: four-year colleges graduate only about 40% of the students who start them, and two-year community colleges graduate less than that, about 23%. “College for everyone has become a matter of political correctness,” says Diane Ravitch, a professor of education at New York University.
In Arizona and more than a few other states, that is beginning to change.
Indeed, the old notion of vocational education has been stood on its head.
It’s now called career and technical education (CTE), and it has become a pathway that even some college-bound advanced-placement students are pursuing. About 27% of the students in Arizona opt for the tech-ed path, and they are more likely to score higher on the state’s aptitude tests, graduate from high school and go on to higher education than those who don’t. “It’s not rocket science,” says Sally Downey, superintendent of the spectacular East Valley Institute of Technology in Mesa, Ariz., 98.5% of whose students graduate from high school. “It’s just finding something they like and teaching it to them with rigor.”
[FULL TEXT BELOW]
Learning That Works
By Joe Klein
Clyde McBride is one of those everyday saints who, without much fanfare, go about the work of changing, and sometimes saving, the lives of children. He teaches agricultural science on the Navajo reservation in Kayenta, Ariz. He’s a memorable-looking fellow, with his cowboy hat, horsehide tie and a body like a giant sack of flour perched on tiny toothpick legs. His most notable characteristic, though, is his persistence. When a new school superintendent arrived in town a few years ago, McBride parked himself on the guy’s doorstep. “He came in and gave me the ‘I have a dream’ speech,” says superintendent Harry Martin. “I told him I’d think about it, but he wouldn’t let me think about it. He was bugging me three, four times a week about it.”
McBride’s dream was a state-of-the-art agricultural-sciences building with two veterinary operating theaters—one for small animals and one for large ones—to train Navajo kids to be veterinary aides and technicians and perhaps even to start a few of them down the road to becoming veterinarians. “I thought it was a waste of money and time,” Martin told me. “I’m an old English teacher. I was very skeptical about vocational education. We needed to be drilling them on basic skills. But McBride said he’d make a believer out of me. And he did.”
Two years later, with the $2.4 million agricultural- and technical-sciences building up and running, Martin says, “It’s without doubt the best program we have. It’s an alternative way to teach them math, science and reading. They love it. They’re attentive, working hard, hands on.” McBride imports veterinarians from around the country to visit the reservation and work with the 226 students, who assist in both operating theaters, prepping animals for surgery and learning how to suture, draw blood and give injections. The veterinary clinic has become a valued resource on the reservation, but more than that, the academic results have been spectacular. “Nearly every one of these kids passed the state comprehensive test we give to 17-year-olds in Arizona,” Martin told me. “Less than about 40% of my non-vocational-education students passed.”
Vocational education used to be where you sent the dumb kids or the supposed misfits who weren’t suited for classroom learning. It began to fall out of fashion about 40 years ago, in part because it became a civil rights issue: voc-ed was seen as a form of segregation, a convenient dumping ground for minority kids in Northern cities. “That was a real problem,” former New York City schools chancellor Joel Klein told me. “And the voc-ed programs were pretty awful. They weren’t training the kids for specific jobs or for certified skills. It really was a waste of time and money.”
Unfortunately, the education establishment’s response to the voc-ed problem only made things worse. Over time, it morphed into the theology that every child should go to college (a four-year liberal-arts college at
that) and therefore every child should be required to pursue a college-prep course in high school. The results have been awful. High school dropout rates continue to be a national embarrassment. And most high school graduates are not prepared for the world of work. The unemployment rate for recent high school graduates who are not in school is a stratospheric 33%. The results for even those who go on to higher education are brutal: four-year colleges graduate only about 40% of the students who start them, and two-year community colleges graduate less than that, about 23%.
“College for everyone has become a matter of political correctness,” says Diane Ravitch, a professor of education at New York University. “But according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, less than a quarter of new job openings will require a bachelor of arts degree. We’re not training our students for the jobs that actually exist.” Meanwhile, the U.S. has begun to run out of welders, glaziers and auto mechanics—the people who actually keep the place running.
In Arizona and more than a few other states, that is beginning to change.
Indeed, the old notion of vocational education has been stood on its head.
It’s now called career and technical education (CTE), and it has become a pathway that even some college-bound advanced-placement students are pursuing. About 27% of the students in Arizona opt for the tech-ed path, and they are more likely to score higher on the state’s aptitude tests, graduate from high school and go on to higher education than those who don’t. “It’s not rocket science,” says Sally Downey, superintendent of the spectacular East Valley Institute of Technology in Mesa, Ariz., 98.5% of whose students graduate from high school. “It’s just finding something they like and teaching it to them with rigor.” Actually, it’s a bit more than that: it’s developing training programs that lead to jobs or recognized certification, often in partnership with local businesses. Auto shop at East Valley, for example, looks a lot different from the old jalopy that kids in my high school used to work on. There are 40 late-model cars and the latest in diagnostic equipment, donated by Phoenix auto dealers, who are desperate for trained technicians. “If you can master the computer-science and electronic components,” Downey says, “you can make over $100,000 a year as an auto mechanic.”
Arizona has another, rather unusual advantage. Its state education superintendent, John Huppenthal, went to high school in Tucson on the voc-ed track. “It was considered the path for losers, but I didn’t know any better,” says Huppenthal, a Republican who was elected to the statewide post. “I came from a family of machinists. I didn’t know anybody who’d gone to college, and I was happy in wood shop. I remember making a chess set, a very complicated project that really made mathematics come alive for me.” He also happened to be a state-champion wrestler with pretty good test scores, and his coach encouraged him to study engineering at Northern Arizona University. “I really believe that some form of CTE is essential for a world-class education,” he says. “Most students respond better to a three-dimensional learning process. It’s easier to learn engineering by actually building a house—which my family did when I was a kid, by the way—than sitting in a classroom figuring out the process in the abstract. Some students can respond to two-dimensional learning, but most respond better when it’s hands on. Every surgeon needs to know how to sew, saw and drill.”
Precise statistics are sparse; it’s difficult to keep track of students after they leave high school. But Carolyn Warner, a former Arizona schools chancellor, says tech-track students “are more focused, so they’re more likely to graduate from two- and four-year colleges. Those who graduate from high school with a certificate technical expertise in a field like auto repair or welding are certainly more likely to find jobs.”
Still, Huppenthal finds vocational school is a tough sell to the state’s education establishment. “It doesn’t have the prestige of a college-prep course,” he says, “and it costs a lot more than two-dimensional education to do it right.” Traditionally, Democrats have tended to be opposed on ideological grounds. They’re the strongest believers in college for everyone. Republicans are reluctant to spend the money on state-of-the-art equipment like the veterinary center on the Navajo reservation, although some concede that CTE programs that prepare students for actual jobs are a good idea. “It’s like walking in a hurricane,” says Huppenthal. “You know where you want to be going, but the winds keep pushing you off course.”
But CTE is beginning to produce its own weather systems—human tornadoes like McBride and Downey, the superintendent at East Valley, who is smart and passionate and extremely pushy, constantly working the business community in Phoenix for help in starting training programs. There are 38 programs on her campus, with more coming. There are firefighter, police and EMT programs; a state-of-the-art kitchen for culinary-services training; and welding (which can pay $48 per hour), aeronautics, radio-station, marketing and massage-therapy instruction. (“We have a lot of resorts around here,” Downey explains, “and our students often work part time as masseurs to earn money for college.”) Almost all of these courses lead to professional certificates in addition to high school diplomas, and many of the students are trained by employers for needed technical specialties. None of her 3,200 students are full time. They spend half a day, usually afternoons, at East Valley and receive academic training at 35 different home high schools in the mornings.
“Look at this,” Downey says as she shows me a fully stocked medical laboratory. “We got $1.5 million from Veterans Affairs to run a program for surgical assistants, and they gave us a teacher to teach it.” The premedical and -nursing students here are dressed in scrubs. Downey barges into a classroom and begins polling the students. “How many of you are going on to some form of higher education?” Almost everyone’s hand goes up. “How many of you are taking advanced-placement programs in your home high schools?” A scattering of hands. “How many of you have had to make sacrifices to come here?” Again, a forest of hands. Most of the sacrifices involve hours of travel and having to give up extracurricular activities.
“And how many of you were discouraged from doing this by your local high schools?” About half. The home high schools tend to have the standard biases against vocational education—that it’s a waste of time, that it takes away from the academic experience.
“The public school system also has a civic purpose,” says Jonathan Zimmerman, an education historian at New York University, citing a common academic argument against vocational education. “You’re not just preparing people to work. You’re preparing people to be citizens. In a democracy, you need citizens who can think critically.” But people with jobs, especially skilled jobs, tend to be better citizens than those without them. And the teamwork involved in the training programs at East Valley and on the Navajo reservation tends to help create a sense of community.
“In my home high school, you’re sitting in a room with 30 other students who don’t care, trying to pay attention to a teacher who doesn’t care,”
says Aaron Pietryga, who is training to become a firefighter. “But [East Valley] is like my family. Most of the kids at my home school don’t have any idea what I’m doing in the afternoon, and when I explain it to them, they say, ‘Wow, you’re doing all that cool stuff, and you’re going to college. Why didn’t I know about that?’”
On a recent chilly morning at the Navajo reservation, McBride was giving Huppenthal and me a hands-on tour of his veterinary facility.
Husband-and-wife veterinarians from Pittsburgh had volunteered their services for a few days and were spaying a dog in the small-animal operating theater, with the help of students in blue surgical scrubs.
“They’re very good,” says Sharon Wirtz, one of the vets. “They have an exceptional feel for this, especially with the larger animals,” like sheep and horses. Students were suturing bananas and injecting oranges with red dye for practice. Recently a pack of wild dogs attacked some sheep on the reservation, and McBride took some students to care for them. “Some of these kids suture better than I do,” he says. “It brings tears to my eyes.”
But his real triumph wasn’t in teaching the Navajo the technical skills.
These students also knew how to make an impression; they had learned the soft skills necessary to be good employees. They looked you in the eye, introduced themselves and shook your hand (which was universally true at East Valley as well). This was striking, given the history of depression and despair on the reservation. “These kids are thirsty. All you’ve got to do,” McBride says, eyes brimming, “is let them drink.”
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.18.12 @ 12:45 AM
This endorsement is a political advertisement that has been poll-tested by high-priced consultants to bamboozle the public to raise their own taxes. I love the part about how none of the money will be spent on overhead, and some of it will be allocated to vocational programs. Of course, no one has any idea - has anyone seen a breakdown of these revenues or even knows how the money was spent in the past. Is there an independent auditor tracking these expenditures? Folks, don’t be fooled by an article full of unverifiable assertions. Here is a question for Ms. Deacon: how much money was spent on consultants and outside firms to package this proposition to get the required amount of votes. For example, exempting seniors (which really doesn’t happen because it is up to the seniors to opt out) is a ploy thought of by these consultants to get the voters to pass these measures.
I looked at my property tax bill and I am paying for 7 of these parcel taxes. This local control Ms Deacon brags about is also a myth. In the end, you, the taxpayer, will just be paying a bunch of local taxes or higher rents in addition to the state and sales taxes you already pay. Lastly, please see my article in the most commented box on the right hand side of this page. I explain why these taxes without any reforms will not improve our schools and will only perpetuate the status quo. Please vote no.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.18.12 @ 08:39 AM
I urge voters to vote YES on Measures W and X. Lou Segal has every right to be concerned about how local parcel tax money is spent. Perhaps, instead of casting suspicions on the monitoring of the past 4 years parcel taxes, he should go down to the school district and ask to look at the records. OF COURSE there are records! In addition, he could ask the citizens who serve on the oversight committee. He could even volunteer for the oversight committee!
PLEASE VOTE YES and don’t be put off by innuendo. Our students need art, science, music and vocational education. Let’s make sure our LOCAL schools are supported by our LOCAL taxes.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.18.12 @ 08:43 AM
Past parcel taxes were sold to voters for optional arts and music classes. I suppose being in a rock band is vocational, and the world knows there is a need for more of them. However, vocational education is key to our nation’s economic success and must be built into regular state funded education operations; and not dependent upon auxiliary parcel taxes.
K-12 already gets 50% of state tax revenues. What has SB schools been doing with this huge amount of money they are already been getting from tax payers? Now SB schools claim it is essential to give them extra money to deliver their basic functions?
Something is wrong with this picture. And problems are called Measure W and Measure X.
Parcel taxes like Measure X and Measure W used this injudiciously by SB schools overturns the intent of Prop 13 protections.
Voters, it is time to say no to this insatiable attack on your back pockets. Vote no on Measures X and Measures W. These are just fronts for the teachers unions to keep more money in their own pockets. Stop this now or the extra taxation demands will never end.
Vote no on Measure W and Measure X. You will not be sorry and the teachers unions will get the best lesson they could ever learn.Spend the Prop 98 50% of state tax revenues more judiciously and there is plenty of money to educate our students.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.19.12 @ 02:10 PM
Notice the irony of the argument. The state can’t take away the monies raised by a local parcel tax. Measure Xand W prove you can’t take away local parcel taxes either once they get put in to place.
Once in place, now our local schools have their hands out endlessly for more, more, more. That should scare anyone away from letting this continue. You have to vote NO on W and X to stop this now.
Education is a function of the state. Parcel taxes should be only for one-time and expiring needs -not a blank check to keep dunning the voters with forever. Someone erred when they built in permanent parcel taxes for SB schools.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.19.12 @ 11:01 PM
Sy you are making statements that are factually wrong and it is irresponsible for you to do so.
“Past parcel taxes were sold to voters for optional arts and music classes.” The word “optional” is only your opinion, and the statement itself leaves out the most significant impact which was the reduction of 9th grade math and English classes.
Furthermore the vocational education you tepidly praise isn’t about rock bands, but high-tech automotive work, computer-aided graphics and design, entrepeneurship, nursing, culinary arts, and yes visual and performance arts.
“These [tax measures] are just fronts for the teachers unions to keep more money in their own pockets.” That is ridiculous and you know it. Teachers unions won’t get any money from W and X just like they didn’t get any from H and I. Read the article again.
“Measure Xand W prove you can’t take away local parcel taxes either once they get put in to place.” This is obviously wrong or we wouldn’t be having this discussion. It only proves that two-thirds of the voters were thinking of our community’s children more than they were thinking of themselves.
You continue to try make schools, students and teachers the enemy of tax-paying citizens. That is shameful, in my opinion, shortsighted, and irresponsible.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.20.12 @ 12:36 AM
Noleta,
See the most recent comment I posted to my article on the same subject.
Turning this argument into one where the supporters have compassion for our children and the opponents are non-feeling scrooges is not only specious, but actually just the opposite of what you would have us believe. No, the people, who are fine with the status quo and don’t agitate to make the necessary reforms to our failing public schools, are actually consigning our children to a future without having the tools to thrive in an increasingly global economy where an excellent education has become vitally important to succeed.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.20.12 @ 08:54 AM
noletares, you obscure the argument.
Yes, parcel tax classes are optional because without the secondary parcel tax they would not exist. Choices were made with state funds to not support these classes and expend those state monies on something else consigning these classes into their parcel tax dependency status. What you list are critical parts of any educational program for our young people. That is not the issue.
The issue is what are schools doing with the money they get from the state that took higher priority than classes that actually benefit students themselves. You can start with union dues, too many paid holidays, unsupportable benefits and perks, shortened school year with no pay loss, automatic pay increases and paid release time.
Take that money and put it back into benefits for the students and stop asking taxpayers for additional parcel tax money, with a side of guilt-inducing dunning if they don’t keep passing them.
Stop this voracious parcel tax monster. Vote NO on X and W. Then work on your priorities that put students first; not benefits for the adults.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.20.12 @ 09:31 AM
You are correct about the need for reform, but I am still voting for the measures because these programs will die and their inspiring teachers will be lost if local funding is not provided.
Something needs to be done at the State level. Local districts are somewhat hamstrung by misguided A-G academic requirements promoted by the University of California for all high school graduates.
A graduation requirement was added a few years ago mandating a second year of algebra. This has proven to be very costly to elective programs. Students who do not pass these courses end up taking remediation. All of this results in less money available to run elective classes.
In the following article, this quote is particularly telling:
“Considering that just 15 percent of the Class of 2011 passed the A-G core with a C or better, an overwhelming number of students would be challenged by the new standards.”
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.20.12 @ 01:24 PM
I’m not obscuring the argument, Sy. I’m keeping it focused where it belongs: on the parcel tax measure’s effects on our schools. When measures H and I were passed a few years ago it made a real difference for a vulnerable segment of our population. Anyone who’s close to the situation knows it to be true. I can understand that if you don’t have high school age kids, or don’t know any teachers and at the same time have extremely unsympathetic views towards our state government or are passionately partisan towards conservatives that you wouldn’t perhaps know what a different those measures made to our kids, or else wouldn’t be quite ready to admit their positive impact. Nonetheless our community actually got real, tangible daily benefit from passing those measures. You can’t say that very often about a tax.
Lou here’s my problem with your arguments. You say that our education system needs vast reforms, and Lord knows you’re right about that. It is stuck in “traditions” that have become irrelevant such as a six-period day, curriculum from the nineteenth century, standardized testing that too many students couldn’t give a rip about, teacher training that hasn’t kept up with the pace of technology, politicians trying to make a name for themselves as “reformers” mucking things up, etc etc. I could go way, way on about it. Maybe the only thing we have in more abundance than problems is a variety of opinions on how to solve them.
But you’re using those systemic, global problems as an argument against these parcel tax measures, which are *proven* to have improved the daily lives of a certain class of our students, and by “certain class” I mean all 9th grade math and English classes. That alone means that virtually every high school student in Santa Barbara has benefited from them. Therefore our entire community has benefited from them.
So what if you don’t like teachers and their unions, and you don’t like the Democrats in Sacramento. None of them will benefit from measures W and X, so you’re not helping them any, nor are you really doing anything against them by not supporting W and X. You want to “send them a message” by not passing these measures, yet you agree that not passing them won’t have any effect on these entities. That “message” will fall on deaf ears.
As the adults in the community we should focus on what we can do to help ourselves. I don’t like seeing more items on my tax statement any more than anyone else. It’s just that in this case we, our kids, actually get something worth paying for. I hope people vote for these measures.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.20.12 @ 03:11 PM
That is the point. If these programs are so valuable, they should be a priority with the funds schools already are getting. They should become part of the basic school budget allocations.
Parcel taxes are shakedowns when threats are used to support them - pay more taxes or else your kids will suffer. Until you clean up why there is no money in the regular school budget for valuable programs first, you cannot expect these programs to last forever on parcel tax life support.
Parcel taxes being renewed endlessly is a sign of extremely poor planning and not a sign of community enlightenment. Parcels taxes should be one time things and NOT renewable operating cash cows that they are right now with these threats and demands they be renewed in perpetuity.
Once the parcel tax door is opened, we are now learning it can never get closed and that is wrong.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.20.12 @ 03:41 PM
Measure X and W supporters are following the playbook. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn tells you what to watch out for:
“Local governments also frequently hire expensive consultants (at taxpayer expense) to tell them the best way to pass a parcel tax. These consultants often advise local officials not to publicize the parcel tax election to the entire community, but to target only their supporters. This means running a stealth election, communicating only with known tax supporters.
It is a frequent tactic used by local governments to schedule low turnout special elections for parcel tax measures, even though such elections are very expensive, in an effort to sneak through a parcel tax. For example, a majority of the local school parcel tax elections over the past few years have been low turnout special elections.
Since it is illegal for local officials to use public resources (including public funds) to urge a vote for or against a political issue, consultants frequently counsel parcel tax supporters on the best way to wage “information” campaigns. This often means putting up signs or sending out material stating all the “good things” a parcel tax will do, but stopping just short of telling people how to vote.
Parcel tax supporters also like to frequently engage in scare tactics to enhance their chances of passing a tax measure. Tax supporters attempt to “scare” voters into supporting a tax increase. Such scare tactics are frequently observed with parcel tax measures associated with public education, health, and public safety. Taxpayers should neither tolerate nor be intimidated by such scare tactics.
When addressing the public, parcel tax backers are frequently encouraged to put the annual cost in simple, friendly sounding terms that usually begin with “it’s only.” “It’s only a few cents a day,” or “it’s only a few dollars per month.” Officials try to make it sound like the coming property tax increase is trivial and that anyone who is opposed must be a cheapskate.:
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.20.12 @ 03:57 PM
Noleta,
I took a look at the website itemizing these expenditures and unlike you I don’t think it is doing much good. I already explained why in a previous comment. However, if you want more money, then dismantle the SB County Board of Education, including Cirone’s position, and transfer the money to the schools. Do you want to answer my previous question: What the heck does he do? Instead of always going to the taxpayer for more money, eliminate the voluminous waste and duplication in the system. Is that too difficult a task for the bureaucrats and the union bosses.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.20.12 @ 04:19 PM
Sy, excellent post. You laid it out perfectly. The District spends taxpayer’s money to hire expensive consultants to figure out ways to deceive the voters or scare them into supporting these measures
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.21.12 @ 02:54 PM
This is exactly what the state government wants you to believe and to do, keep adding more and more burden on local property owners so it can cut back on more and more of the funds it OWES your children. They hold your kids hostage to fuel their greed, then you wimp out and hold locals hostage for the money the state OWES you.
Again, the state will simply withhold funds in lieu of the funds you receive from local tax initiatives. They have done it before and will do it again and then they will still hold your kids hostage to fuel the corrupt public service union/democrat legislator stranglehold on our state treasury. Meanwhile these same law makers will pander to leftist/liberal/progressive political interests and drive more revenue generating business out of the state ramping up the burden even more on the tax payer.
If you will not have the vision to see where this will end I invite you to look at Greece today.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.21.12 @ 03:12 PM
Voters must never forget we hire the lawmakers that do this do us.
Time we fire union backed lawmakers. It is that simple. The fault is not in the stars but in ourselves.
Do not vote for union backed lawmakers. Then they can’t keep making union-favored laws. Santa Barbara School District had union board members now sitting on both sides of the bargaining table.
And it is these very union backed board members now out pushing for these parcel taxes. How dumb is that?
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.22.12 @ 08:29 AM
Vote NO on this, on Das, on Taxin’ and on all the other pols who have misallocated tax funds away from education. We don’t need more taxes - we need people in office who will set the right priorities.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.23.12 @ 08:24 AM
Fire the following union-supported and union-beholden candidates:
1. Taxin’ Hannah-Beth Jackson
2. Lois Capps
3. Das Williams
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.23.12 @ 11:19 AM
Our friends on the left do not see unions as the problem. Until they do they will continue to have their children and their representatives victimized by union leadership. Even union members are largely oblivious to the manipulation and greed for power their union leadership represents.
To my friends on the left, utilize that remarkable power of observation you focus so well on private corporations and the greed, lust for power and manipulation you see them exercising, at those institutions you now support, big governments and unions.
If you see evil in the size and control businesses have, then you must see that same evil in other institutions as well. There is little difference in my book. In fact I see quite a bit more evil, greed and lust for power in those institutions that have insulated themselves from market forces and have infiltrated every level of government to ensure their protection. What goes for corporations, also goes for labor unions and government institutions and be particularly weary of the collapse of open mindedness and freedom of thought in our institutions of higher learning and the media.
We can always bicker and fight about what ideology we feel is better, but right now we have a common fight and that is against the corruption of all our institutions, public or private, by greedy and power lusting special interest groups and individuals. We on the right have the job of tackling corporate greed, market manipulation and the destruction of our free enterprise system by elites, you on the left need to reign in the power lusting leadership that has corrupted unions and government.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.23.12 @ 02:51 PM
You cannot get out of California public education today without being thoroughly indoctrinated with pro-union, pro-Democrat bias at every level of class room and extra-curricular activity.
Will the growing conservatism of aging baby boomers finally re-set this agenda at the ballot box? Hopeful trends showing this will happen in the next few years.
Or will this adverse trend that accelerated in only the past few decades collapse under its own unsustainable weight and the younger generation stuck with the bills finally wake up to realize the “ideals” they were indoctrinated with throughout their public education career were in fact greed and special privilege for the few career public employees, now paid well into the future at their generations expense?
Audit a poli sci class at your local institutions of higher ed (UCSB or SBCC) and learn this first hand for yourself. Sit in on classes when faculty are in union driven salary negotiations and see how classrooms on any subject are turned into faculty benefit propaganda machines. This is what your education tax dollars have been buying. Stop throwing more money at education until you get basic reforms guaranteed.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.23.12 @ 06:10 PM
In honor of our resident ham fisted Jarvisite curmudgeons , I cast my votes today for W & Y .
As one who never flinched at voting down a tax increase, never hesitated to cross party lines to vote for the best candidate , those days are probably gone forever.
The more I see the radicalism that has gripped the GOP , the more I react to counter them in the ballot box.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.23.12 @ 08:34 PM
GWW,
Do you have a reading comprehension problem. If you think the reason why some of us refuse to vote for these half-baked measures is because of a parsimonious nature, then you are more thick-headed than I thought. Some of you liberals are too far gone to see the nose in front of you face. Read the articles and comments and if you still don’t get it, then stand with your union brethren as we watch a generation of our youth receive a substandard education from a lousy public education system. It is so frustrating having to deal with the morons on the left.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.23.12 @ 10:37 PM
Gee willikers, liberals usually rent, so they think they are spending other people’s money when they support parcel taxes. Stick it to the rich is their mantra when they vote, and this case this is the liberal’s landlord.
This is as far as liberals are invested in the argument. Until the landlord passes on the parcel taxes in the form of increased rent.
Then rather than seeing the cause and effect, the liberal then rails against the greedy landlord and never sees the connection his vote played in this whole equation.
There are more owners than renters voting. Measure X and Y will be defeated this, as it should.
Follow the money to see who supports these Measures and what their own selfish interest is in seeing these measures pass. Someone is paying for all the pro-tax media.
Voters are too smart this time around because there are no arguments to support this continual increase to the owner’s property tax burden. Not enough votes are for sale in this town. Measure X and Y will be defeated. They will not get their 2/3’s vote.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.24.12 @ 02:57 AM
My reading comprehension is just fine. This article points out our low national average per pupil spending and that these measures are merely replacing expiring ones. I am fine with continuing to pay a levee that I am already paying as a property owner.
My school teacher neighbor has been spending thousands of dollars annually , out of her own pocket, to supplement classroom supplies that budget slashing has eliminated. Thats where you ham fisted Jarvisites figure into the equation.
Furthermore , I am simply adopting the strategy that your Congressional majority has perfected. If you are for it , I am against it.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.24.12 @ 08:08 AM
Willie, why the partisan stubbornness? Sy has pointed out the lesser known evil of passing parcel tax measures, higher rents for those who can afford them least. All we on the right have pointed out is that there is plenty of money for our children’s education, but that it is spent on non educational things like pensions and the salaries of incompetent teachers or management we don’t need. All we said is that since the democrat party has a lock on the state legislature we on the right have little control over how the unions have corrupted the state government for their own greed. We just pointed out that big union interests are no different than private sector corporate greed and lust for power.
Just taking a contrary position on this matter is exactly what the unions hope for. They want you to see this as a right/left issue and want to play your partisan angst so you won’t see the real issue which is the people versus public service unions. As long as we fight each other they are happy. They happy to steal the wages of teachers, firefighters, law enforcement and public workers so they can fund their political machine where they buy politicians like Das Williams and use them as puppets. I like Das, I hate that he sold his soul to the union monster to fund his campaigns every bit as much as you would hate a republican selling his soul to some corporation.
If we can’t recognize the real problem Willie we are doomed to be puppets controlled by powerful money interests and in this case our children, already used as hostages by unions, are the real victims. Save the parsimonious debates for our differences on ideology, don’t let that cloud your judgment on an issue we should be soldering together for and that is fighting to get control away from the greedy and powerful and back to we the people.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.24.12 @ 09:44 AM
Well, folks,
I am a progressive liberal voter and I have been a landlord for 40 years….yes, I own multiple properties. Sorry…we are not all renters!
My rents are fair and I am voting YES on Measures W and X.
I also am very close to local education…meaning I know many students and teachers and administrators. I know how hard they work and I know for a FACT that most students who apply themselves in our local PUBLIC junior high and high schools
get a good, solid education.
Unfortunately, this important institution of public education…which I imagine we are all (?) products of is under incredible stress. Prop 13 meant that the voters CHOSE to give Sacramento the power of the purse over local school funding. I guess if you are happy with having people in Sacramento run your schools…we gave up what the Boston Tea Party was all about—the power of the purse.
A parcel tax is one way to reclaim that power through LOCAL control of what courses WE want our students to have access to and how big WE think their class sizes should be.
Interesting that conservatives believe that the STATE should tell local schools districts what to do…I, as a progressive liberal think that WE should have good schools and that local control and the power of the purse—to PAY FOR what we want—is central to a democracy.
So…I’m voting FOR both parcel tax measures. I believe in a positive democracy rather than a naysaying democracy. There is no free lunch folks.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.24.12 @ 11:36 AM
sb native, unbelievably you missed the entire point. You really need to do some research about our public schools before you write these posts. Tell you what, why don’t you send your kids to Franklin School before you lecture us about local control (a bogus issue). Ignorance and hypocrisy seems to be two qualities the liberal crowd is intimately familiar with. The teacher unions love you guys: no matter how much they fight any sensible reforms for our schools, ideological, non-thinking liberals will support them no matter what.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 05.25.12 @ 05:40 PM
1. We have been throwing money at education for decades and educational outcomes has only gotten worse. But teacher pay and benefits have all gotten better. Per pupil spending is obviously no guarantee of success and never will be.
2. Teacher out of pocket expenses to pay for class room supplies has been a shibboleth hawked for so long that that dog don’t hunt no more. Just use your teacher union dues if you want instant money every month to put to a better use.
3. It is not the taxpayers fault there is less money for present class room concerns. It is the teacher union’s fault for tying up our present tax dollars for teacher benefits already rendered.
4. Defined benefit retirement for teachers is sinking the entire system. Change that first to defined contribution retirement plans and then start seeing more present money for present uses. Teachers live in an entitlement ivory tower and it is time they got with the real world. No wonder our children are not learning anything useful.
5. Teachers unions have to show the taxpayers first they will reform their own abuses and get back on board teaching children well and in the present. \\
6. Constantly demanding more and more money every year for exactly the same things means their demands are useless and insatiable.
7. Measure X and W will not pass and this is why. Please work with this frustration voters are feeling about education. Every year it is the same thing with the same demands and the same threats. We gave you this money but we still have not seen the results. Game is over.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson: Prevent and Prepare for the Next Fire
Dr. Scott Saunders: 10 Myths That Obese People Believe
A Mother Remembers the Dark Days of Her Child’s Battle with Cancer
The memories of a young daughter's treatment at Cottage Children's Hospital are a gift — a reason to focus on what's important in life
Stuart Light: Things My Mother Taught Me
Salud Carbajal: California Should Accept Federal Money to Expand Health Coverage
Weather: Fair 69.0º
Search Noozhawk »


