- 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
Education Foundation Would Support Another Run at School Parcel Tax Measures
Though tired from months of hard work, Santa Barbara Education Foundation board members have decided they would run another parcel tax campaign if the school district asks them to do so.
The Santa Barbara Unified School District’s Board of Education will meet Tuesday night to discuss the next steps for Measures W and X, which narrowly lost at the ballot box last week.
It was the third campaign by the Education Foundation for the district — the 2008 parcel tax measures and 2010 general obligation bond measures were easily passed by the community — and board president Lynn Rodriguez said the board had a long discussion about why these measures failed.
“We came to the conclusion that the major reason we lost, as we suspected might happen, is because it was a primary election with typically lower turnout and more conservative voters (less likely to support any tax),” she wrote in an email. “We had an uphill battle from the start, and we are grateful to have gotten as many votes as we did.”
Measure W, which applies to secondary schools in Santa Barbara and Goleta, received 64.8 percent approval, and Measure X, for elementary schools, got 65.7 percent approval, just short of the 66.66 needed for a two-thirds majority.
The current Measure H and I will expire next July, and replacing them — at a doubled rate, $54 per parcel instead of $23 and $27 — was seen as a way to save the music, arts and foreign language programs with $16 million over four years.
Rodriguez said no other fundraising efforts on the foundation’s part would be able to provide that level of financial support.
Godbe Research consultants suggested a push for June’s election given the competition in November by Gov. Jerry Brown’s tax initiative.
Santa Barbara Mayor Helene Schneider planned to present tax-related initiatives in the fall as well, but she announced Tuesday that she has decided to push her efforts to the November 2013 city election.
In February, Schneider announced she would gather signatures for pension reform, a half-cent sales tax and business license tax initiatives. She wanted to pursue an advisory measure to split the revenues between the city and the school district.
The education community initially opposed the idea, worried that the plan would compete with June’s parcel taxes to guarantee millions of dollars for SBUSD funding, but many education leaders supported Schneider at Tuesday’s news conference.
— Noozhawk staff writer Giana Magnoli can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.
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 06.12.12 @ 06:01 PM
In the current climate, my guess is another parcel tax proposal will fail by an even greater margin.
Save your foundation money for another parcel tax campaign and do the following instead:
(1) start a voluntary donation campaign for both teacher union members to opt out of forced union membership and direct their union dues to the SB Education Foundation and
(2) get parcel tax supporters to make voluntary contribution annually for the next four years of the same amount they would have paid under the defeated parcel tax.
Until teachers unions make reforms, voters no longer want to throw more money at schools with no results and no guarantees. The state economy is slightly improving which means schools will already get an automatic and increasing 50% Prop 98 share of all new state tax revenues.
Use this new state Prop 98 money to support the failed parcel tax programs. Don’t hand this new state money over to teacher union demands. That would be an act of bad faith with the voters. You will never get another parcel tax passed if this is how you use taxpayer money.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.12.12 @ 06:07 PM
I would vote for them if they eliminated the senior citizen exemption, and chose local consultants and contractors to do the improvement projects.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.12.12 @ 07:22 PM
Everyone keeps saying teacher unions need to be reformed and changed, but nobody ever actually says what those reforms and changes should be. Can someone please enlighten me and let me understand what those would be. Everyone says they get paid too much. Ok I understand what you are saying, so what should teachers get paid?
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.12.12 @ 08:25 PM
The biggest issue with the teacher union contract is that it makes it very difficult to lay off incompedent teachers particularly if they are senior.
We need to reform the way we pay (better teachers should get paid more) and retain (lower preforming teachers should be fired) teachers.
I think the school district got too greedy, asking for more than double the current bond.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.12.12 @ 09:51 PM
CitizenSB is absolutely correct. I would recommend that anyone interested in the type of reforms we are calling for should read the SB District collective bargaining agreement with the union. It is a travesty. A principal is totally hamstrung, as he is unable to fire or discipline ineffective teachers. Evaluations happen only every other year, and they really don’t matter because there are no consequences. You cannot pay a great teacher more than a badly performing teacher. It is even difficult to reassign an ineffective teacher. There are 25 pages dedicated to teacher leaves of absence. Believe it or not, there are over 17 different type of leaves. There are so many crazy rules and regulations, there is no way a principal can run a school.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.12.12 @ 10:35 PM
Unbelievable. What do you mean you don’t know what needs to be reformed? Start with the dense volumes that make up the California Education Code. Teacher union-friendly legislators have piled regulation upon regulation in these multiple volumes of state education laws - all for teacher protections; all having zero to nothing to do for students.
You of course know at the 11th hour to get last year’s budget passed, teacher union-friendly legislators snuck in a provision that no teacher can be terminated, even if there is no money in the district. Justify that one out for us, and then ask why you think there are no reasons to reform education in California.
Just search the internet for education reform and teacher union watch-dog organizations if you want more details. Educate yourself. Lou Segal is right. The first place to read the contracts teachers are getting right here in Santa Barbara.
This parcel tax was just papering over the unsustainable contracts your teacher union-friendly board of education members have been writing these past years, right under your noses. Know who you are voting for next time. Pay attention to who is endorsing your school board candidates. Nothing could be clearer.
No wonder the SB schools say they have no money left over for core classes and student needs. No wonder the school board demands to make parcel taxes permanent now. Read the contract and you will see all the perks and benefits that are built into the system, which is why schools are chronically out of money for the classrooms. It is all going out the back door in perks and benefits with no accountability, limitation or voluntary reform.
Stop putting teacher unions on both sides of the bargaining table or else all you will get is lousy education for your children, iron-clad contracts for teachers, and more teacher union dues going directly to union bosses used to buy more teacher union friendly legislators that keep this sweetheart deal going at you and your children’s expense.
Wisconsin got it right. Follow their lead.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.12.12 @ 10:37 PM
Democrats dont get it, we have a huge spending problem.
No new taxes to the highest taxed state in the nation.
Live within your means like the rest of us.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.12.12 @ 11:04 PM
Even the LA Times is running articles about needed teacher reform and calling out the California Teachers Association - CTA - the biggest and baddest teachers union in the state who have also co-opted local PTA’s as well - it is one massive teacher protection front abusing your children with their concentration of power in California today.
This is not a local issue and local parcel taxes are not the answer. Teacher union influence has to be kicked out at the state level or else your local taxes will always be on the line for more, more, more. You must education because public education is a state wide crisis and a local parcel tax bandaid is not the solution. Don’t be party to this parcel tax-teacher union fraud.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.13.12 @ 08:23 AM
OK, let me get this straight. Some people don’t like elements of the teachers’ union contract, others don’t like parts of the state education code. Therefore, they will vote no on any parcel tax, the result of which will be elimination of art, music, science, and technology programs throughout the district. Got it.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.13.12 @ 08:43 AM
Hey surfy, you got it. Now go back and tell all your dopy liberal friends that when they clean up the education code and get the democrat politicians out of the union’s pockets, then we’ll see if we need more money.
Think of it like this, your kid comes up to you drunk and whacked out on cocaine and asks you for more allowance so he can buy a book. Do you give him the money, because you really want him to read, even though you know he’s just going to blow it on more drugs? Or do you cut him off and tell him to clean up his act, and if he does then you will consider the request?
That is what we are saying, clean it up, cut the corruption and stop the revolving union door. What I keep hearing from your side is, ignore the problems just throw more money we don’t have at it because we really don’t want to deal with the problems.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.13.12 @ 10:21 AM
Actually surfdaddio has accurately nailed the non sequitur you guys are clinging to for dear life: the teacher’s union and the California Ed Code have nothing, I repeat _nothing_ to do with the parcel tax issue. At least Sy has offered one alternative that will actually help: a voluntary contribution. The rest of you bozos are simply camouflaging your knee-jerk miserliness and hatred of all things moderate and progressive with the cloak of anti-labor and anti-public education politics. Teacher evaluation schedules, hiring practices, and all the things you don’t like about the teaching profession, whether they are legitimate complaints (like the difficulty in firing burnt-out or incompetent teachers) or stupid analogies like AN50 makes about drug addicted teenagers are all just part of your confused, scattershot smoke screen to blur the actual issue.
We are talking about a locally-controlled attempt at ameliorating a bad situation in our local schools. This parcel tax money does not go to the Union! Only a propagandist or a fool would make that claim. NONE of your complaints about unions are germane to the parcel tax issue and having to point that out over and over is making you look extremely dense. Try to stay on topic: parcel tax money helps students. If you don’t like taxes, join the freekin club: nobody does! But get it through your head that this money is what WE as a community have decided to do to help our students, and it will help students. It doesn’t give the Union anything, it doesn’t make it easier for a teacher to take a day off, it doesn’t mean Sacramento gets off the hook, it doesn’t make life harder for principals, and it doesn’t mean bad teachers will still have a job. It only means our kids will get more help in Math and English, and our Arts and Music programs will be supported.
Measure X only missed by a little over 200 votes, and Measure W by around 900. The backers are smart to try again because it’s worth it.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.13.12 @ 05:42 PM
No, no and NO again. What you are doing is covering for the disaster in Sacramento. We already give the state enough, get that through your thick addled brain will you? The point we are making if you would stop jerking your knee through your forehead, is that this LOCAL tax gets the state OFF the HOOK and our answer to that is NO!!! Stop the damned gravy train at the state level, cut the BS and stop unions and legislators from holding your children hostage for more, then you won’t need to pile LOCAL taxes on our already high STATE taxes.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 06.15.12 @ 08:32 AM
Not newsworthy for Santa Barbara
Joni Gray is likely to me implicated
The Grand Jury noted that the terms and conditions of loan contracts between the county and LHCDC varied from contract to contract over the years, but concluded that “it was the monitoring and enforcement of the loan requirements that ultimately fell short.”
The loan agreements offered many opportunities to demand accountability by LHCDC, but “the (county) Department of Housing and Community Development simply didn’t do its job in seizing the opportunities available in the agreements,” according to the report.
Lompoc also failed to enforce its loan agreements and covenant restrictions “when there was a clear pattern of failing to respond to the agency’s requests,” the report stated.
The city’s Redevelopment Agency loaned LHCDC about $1.7 million while the nonprofit was “technically out of compliance,” according to the report.
Included in the report was extensive correspondence between LHCDC and government overseers that reveals how oversight was delayed. Among the correspondence:
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Meaghan Yolles of Santa Barbara Earns Degree from Skidmore College
Abraham Middleton of Santa Barbara Initiated Into NSU’s Rho Theta Sigma Honor Society
Bragg Health Institute Installs Greenhouse at San Marcos for Environmental Horticulture
Providence Hall to Present Spring Concert on Saturday
SBMS Micro-Finance Project — Teaching the World to Fish By Learning to Feed the Soul
Weather: Fair 51.0º
Search Noozhawk »
