School District Counting on Voter Support-

The Piedmont Unified School District supports the passage of both Proposition 30 and Proposition 38 because each would provide needed revenue to public schools.

Since the onset of the state‘s fiscal crisis in 2008, public schools statewide have experienced unprecedented funding reductions and apportionment deferrals totaling more than $20 billion. State funding to Piedmont has decreased from $5,837 per student in 2008 to $5,255 in 2012, for a reduction of $582/student and a cumulative loss of $7M in State funding since 2008. California public schools now rank 47th out of the 50 states in average per-pupil spending, and Piedmont receives even less than the California average.

The 2012-13 California state budget is predicated on voters approving Prop 30 on November 4. Failure of Proposition 30 will trigger automatic cuts to K-12 education throughout California. The effect on Piedmont will be an immediate reduction of an additional $1.1 million dollars annually from the state. Passage of Proposition 38, which is also on the November ballot, would direct billions of dollars to public schools, although we would still have the trigger cuts described above. If both measures pass, then the one with the most votes would go into effect. Voters will not be taxed twice.

Because the Piedmont Board of Education is committed to making policy and financial decisions to help the school district provide quality educational programs and services, we support both measures that provide funding for public education.

Andrea Swenson,

Trustee and Vice President, Piedmont Board of Education

Link:  BOARD RESOLUTION

Editors Note: The Piedmont Civic Association does not support or oppose candidates or ballot measures.

Resident urges focus on key issues-

Measure Y has attracted widespread attention, as well as yet more divisiveness in our City.

I do not believe that the most important issue is either the amount or history of the parcel tax.  Rather, the real issues are:

• What, if any, so-called essential services would be adversely impacted if Measure Y were defeated, and
• How has it come to pass that both the MTRC and BAC have opined that the current compensation and benefit levels for employees , even after the recent negotiations, are unsustainable and out of control?  > Click to read more…

Resident identifies Council’s misstatements –

I do not support the proposed parcel tax. The city’s official position statement, written by (Mayor John) Chiang and  (Councilman Jeff) Wieler, has material factual misstatements.

The Council (except Keating) who are mostly attorneys, the City Administrator and City Attorney have been less than forthright about things the past few years. They previously spread misinformation and scare tactics on the proposed and defeated sewer tax. The deceptions and the arrogance that leads to this behavior needs to stop.  > Click to read more…

Member of  League of Women Voters Undergrounding Task Force hopes Measure Y defeat will force  sense of urgency-

I believe strongly in the power of government and ungrudgingly accept my tax burden.  So why am I, a 27-year Piedmont resident, opposing Measure Y?  Reluctantly I have concluded that this is the only way for Piedmonters to send a strong message that they want the City Council to make urgently needed reforms.  > Click to read more…

Piedmont resident urges a “slimmed down” City parcel tax –

While I supported the Parcel Tax Renewal for the past 30 years,  this year I am urging my friends to vote “NO” on Measure Y.

My objections to the Measure Y tax are twofold:  > Click to read more…

 Resident Believes Parcel Tax is Not the Problem-

Employee benefit liabilities and costly missteps recently made by city officials are cause for community concern, but the [City] parcel tax is not the culprit.

The parcel tax contributes to the revenue that enables the city to provide above-average municipal services. A decade ago it did allow generous (competitive) compensation packages for city employees. The parcel tax, however, is not a slush fund. Nor is it onerous, amounting to about five percent of annual property taxes for most households. The school tax is five times that amount.  > Click to read more…

October & November School Board Meetings Open Discussions on  Parcel Tax-

The Piedmont School Board Invites Public Input 

The Piedmont School Board will decide whether to ask voters to renew the School Support Tax at a November 28 Special Meeting.  At its next three regular meetings (October 10 and 24, and November 14), the Board will review and discuss options for the proposed measure, including duration, amount, potential to increase, and any potential exemptions.  By November 14, the Board expects there will be a draft measure developed based on recommendations, discussion and public input.  Given State funding cuts, the existing School Support Tax constitutes over 30% of the District’s budget and thus its renewal is incredibly important to the education of our community’s children.  I encourage anyone who has input for the Board’s consideration in developing the proposal to be put to voters in March 2013 to attend one of the next three Board meetings or email Board members with your comments.

Thank you for your involvement!

Richard W. Raushenbush,

Board President Piedmont Unified School District

Editors’ Note:   The opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Piedmont Civic Association.

Resident Rebuts Council Member’s Assertions –

Editor,

Piedmont City Councilman Jeff Wieler has recently argued that a reduction of one firefighter per shift in Piedmont would result in a lower rating for the city’s fire protection by the Insurance Services Office (ISO), and a higher insurance cost for homeowners.

This is absolute nonsense and another example of Measure Y proponents’ scare tactics.  > Click to read more…

Parcel Taxes Unfairly Based on Parcel Size –

 Dear Fellow Piedmonters,

On September 19th, I received a “Vote Yes on Measure Y” mailer from Mayor 
John Chiang. The proponents keep “spinning” the talking point that Measure Y is not a new tax, but just 
a continuation of a old tax for General City Services. This is not true.  > Click to read more…

Resident Wants “Transparency and Honesty”-

City Council gave $2.45M of taxpayer money to the Hills undergrounding district. City Council then authorized each other to investigate themselves. Naturally, they found no fault with themselves. City Administrator Grote was the staff for the “audit” and investigated himself. Repeated requests for an independent investigation were responded to with silence.  > Click to read more…