18 July 2007

Fwd: Re: Endorsers of Meausre G - Broken down to $$$$$$$

--- In wccusdtalk@yahoogroups.com, "Alicia" <ladyluvslife@...> wrote:

>>>Thanks to Greg for his most insightful and THOUGHT PROVOKING
reply to my post. Greg, I will respond in length when I am feeling
a bit better - You and your wife really are a team of WONDER PARENTS.

Tammy, please do not invite me to any more meetings publically on
this list. For a couple of reasons..........I can truly say
BEEN THERE DONE THAT - and I have WALKED THE WALK to determine
the area I am most effective in answering that question
Sure, maybey not as long as you, Scottie, Kevin & Marsha.
But LONG ENOUGH to know that meetings, meetings and meetings
made me neglect my own children to figure out what was wrong
with the school district. And THAT AINT RIGHT. You can better
believe that there are MANY PARENTS LIKE ME.
Most of them have
not made the efforts I have to educate myself on the issues and
what the REAL PICTURE IS. I would HATE to see them get the
impression that they must neglect their own children to
attend a bunch of meetings to be POWERFUL PARENTS. In
fact, this is a extreme DRAIN OF POWER for the parent.
Sure the school board meetings are important if an issue
is before the board and maybey I could see someone wanting
to join a committee if they have something to bring to that

Your continued cry that people MUST attend meetings, people
MUST go listen to the experts so you can hear from THEM how
to make a difference is perpetuating a myth that has been
the DOWNFALL of parental involvement in this district.

We the parents are the FIRST EXPERTS on our kids
Tammy take your never surrender enthusiasm and join us
in forcing the district to adopt a PARENT INVOLVEMENT
policy. At one time, WCCUSD's PARENT INVOLVEMENT policy
was used as an example for district's around the STATE

That way, when parents do NOT get involved we CAN say that
the district has made the efforts necessary to encourage
involvement! That way, we CAN say the district did their


--- In wccusdtalk@yahoogroups.com, Tammera Campbell
<tammeracampbell@> wrote:
> I would like to remind everyone that the district website has a
link to a spreadsheet that states where our parcel tax money has gone
these last few years. Measure G is a renewal of this parcel tax with
one new addition, safety, hence the need for additional funding.
Remember the district is required to put these revenues in a
different pot and must demonstrate where the money goes. I believe
that they have done that. We can either choose to support this
measure or lay off teachers, counselors, librarians, coaches, site
supervisors, police officers, etc. Our secondary schools have much
to lose if this does not pass.
> I would like to extend an invitation to Alicia to join us at the
budget advisory meetings so she can get a real close look at the
money and pose her questions there so clear answers can be provided.
I believe Alicia you might find our meetings interesting. And may I
also point out the MGT audit, have you read it? There have been many
independent and state audits over the years that have certified and
supported the district. I know that there is much more work to be
done, but I feel in my 22+ years volunteering in my schools, I have
seen a different district this last year.
> Alicia with regards to endorsements, I don't think anyone is
trying to hide anything. We all know who held what office when.
Their names are on the flyers because their names are well known. I
am an active parent and yes I have a vested interested in how the
district runs and how it will survive. My interests include my
youngest son Devin, who will be a sophomore at PVHS next year, all
the kids who attend WCCUSD schools because they deserve and
education, all our employees because they serve and need their jobs,
and finally the value of my home.
> Alicia I should also point out that there haven't been fulltime
librarians in the elementary schools since the state takeover. We
even lost librarians for a few years when my boys were in elementary
school. Now we have part time librarians, but when you have so many
small elementary schools it would be hard to completely fund every
school full time. There are librarians at the secondary level
though. Remember Measure G does not cover all the full expenses of
the designated items, but supplements what is already in our budget
so we can provide more.
> I whole heartedly endorse Measure G because everyone will lose if
it does not pass.
> Tammy Campbell
> gregorychang <gregorychang@> wrote:
> Dear Alicia, thanks for sharing your views on this subject. As a
> relative newcomer to WCCUSD, it is helpful and interesting to hear
> contrary viewpoints. It helps us get more educated about these
> I have been in favor of Measure G, partially out of self interest
> because I have two young children and I think class size reduction
> for K-3 is something they will really benefit from, along with a
> of other children.
> I'm also partial to anything to do with sports and libraries (my
> was a school librarian) so I support additional funding for that.
> In the bigger picture, it's my belief that we in California do not
> spend enough money on public education. Someone mentioned that we
> 49th out of 50 states in terms of education spending. I dont know
> that is true or not, but our spending priorities do seem out of
> in the great nation-state of California. (SF Chron reported over
> weekend that overtime wages for correctional officers and prison
> medical personnel is $500 million this year alone. Maybe more
> resources would help prevent the need for expanded prisons by
> kids an opportunity to avoid that path?)
> Hearing your viewpoint is helpful to challenge my own assumptions.
> fact, if possible, I would like to hear more specifics about why
> oppose Measure G. I did find it refreshing that your post did not
> contain any knee-jerk reaction against more taxes simply out of a
> hatred of additional taxes. Not all taxes are created equal!
> One point you raise is the concern about lack of fiscal
> responsibility. You do seem to argue that giving the school
> more money will only lead to more waste, inefficiencies and
> corruption, which one must admit is a distinct possibility. Yet the
> alternative will be a cut in services which is not something I want
> to live with either. I am also concerned about fiscal
> and yet support additional services for the kids. Are these goals
> mutually exclusive? I guess it will depend on the honesty and
> competence of our leaders. Have they earned our trust and do they
> deserve our faith? This is a question we must wrestle with.
> The other point you bring up is that the campaign in favor of
> G is misleading. You say that elementary libraries are still
> understaffed and usually open only one day a week depending on
> volunteers. While I agree that the district could provide more
> specifics on how the money is spent, the breakdown they do provide
> informative. It clearly states that there is funding for six full
> time elementary librarians. So six is not enough to go around the
> entire district, which must have dozens of elementary schools. It
> clear that elementary schools that will not get a fulltime
> A bigger question I have is whether some schools are getting more
> district-funded library services than others?
> If you are right that the resources are shared fairly in a way that
> each school gets a professional librarian one day a week, the way I
> see it, one day a week is better than nothing. I am not sure if it
> true that each elementary gets one day a week, though. Assuming six
> librarians, that would mean 30 schools get served every week. Does
> anyone know if this is accurate? This is a good example of where
> supporters of Measure G could use more detailed information.
> Also, what about middle school and high school libraries? Are they
> open every day thanks to the parcel tax? It lists funding for six
> librarians at both the middle school and high school level so it
> would seem to be enough to keep them open on a daily basis.
> So I acknowledge and agree with you that there are some missing
> details. But I am not convinced that is a good enough reason to
> oppose the measure.
> Your other key point is that the campaign in support of measure G
> misleading because it doesnt list the previous affiliation of some
> the people who have endorsed the measure, such as former school
> members. I noticed that the former Richmond mayor is also listed
> without her former designation.
> I will leave it to the campaign managers to discuss why they
> to leave off prior designations -- are they really trying to
> the voters? Again, I dont see that as a big enough reason to vote
> against this program.
> From what I have heard, some people are against measure G because
> they are fed up with fiscal mismanagement on the part of WCCUSD
> certainly doesnt have the best track record. The concern I would
> is that cutting off the funds will ultimately hurt the children
> rather than teaching WCCUSD any specific lessons about how to
> finances in a more effective way.
> For me, it may come down to this: Will turning down measure G
> in a better or worse school district with more or less opportunites
> for the children?
> ---------------------------------
> Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with
Yahoo! FareChase.
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- End forwarded message ---