I will be voting Yes on Prop E this June because it is a powerful way for this community to help our public schools in their time of need. Traditionally, our public schools are funded entirely by the State of California on a per pupil basis. Last year, the State of California changed its funding formula, to the detriment of Coronado schools, and will now be funding school districts around the state at a higher rate than our own kids here in Coronado. In the San Diego Unified School District, they will receive over $1,000 more, per student, than we will receive to educate our students here in Coronado. To address this shortfall, our locally elected School Board is reaching out to us, the community of Coronado, to help bolster our schools and to secure funds needed to maintain what we have built over the last ten decades.

I trust my fellow neighbors who serve on the School Board. They wouldn’t come to us with this urgent call if it weren’t necessary. The last time our school district asked for our help as a community was in 1998 to build a new Middle School. This community answered that call and passed Prop KK in 1998, and today, we have a beautiful facility with students whose API number (Academic Performance Index) of 921/1000 is one of the highest, if not the highest, in San Diego County. The CUSD didn’t let us down in 1998 and they won’t let us down in 2014. I hope this community answers the call to help our schools.

I have read some letters opposed to Prop E that insist that our School Board and Community leaders cannot be trusted. I have read letters that insist on conspiracy theories and innuendos as grounds for everyone to vote no on this prop. I urge you to reject these cynical claims. All five school board members own property in Coronado. They will have the same new charges on their property tax bills as anyone else if Prop E passes. Of the eight elected Coronado officials who support Prop E, I am the only one who doesn’t own a home here in Coronado (although, my parents do own here in town.) The eight elected officials supporting Prop E range from being in their thirties to being in their fifties, sixties, or seventies. We are from all different walks of life, and three of the eight have served in the military. There are no boogie men hiding behind the grassy knoll of Prop E. Those in favor do so to support our schools and think that voting Yes on Prop E is the right thing for this community to do to keep our schools strong as we march forward into the future. Please join us in voting Yes on E in June.
-

Related stories:  Prop E

Views: 1561

Tags: community, prope, schools

Comment by Buzz Fink on April 25, 2014 at 11:07am
Casey,
I agree. Very well said.
Comment by Mayor Casey Tanaka on April 25, 2014 at 1:56pm

Thank you Buzz!!

Comment by Mike Casey on April 25, 2014 at 7:32pm

I wouldn't vote for it, but I'm trying to curry favor with you, for some unknown reason, so I will.

This is absolutely not true; but I was trying to see if I could encapsulate one of the more ludicrous "anti" arguments I've heard recently.  When it's written down, it seems even more ludicrous. 

Comment by Mayor Casey Tanaka on April 25, 2014 at 9:33pm

Indeed!

Comment by Aaron Schwartz on April 25, 2014 at 9:36pm

Mr. Casey,

Your comment makes no sense.  The other Casey seems to agree with you, so, that sums it up!!

Comment by Mike Casey on April 26, 2014 at 6:35pm

Mr. Schwartz - I was making a lousy effort at satire; this is why it's best left to the professionals.  

What I was pointing out was an "argument" I've seen presented by opponents of Prop E; the logic of the argument is basically "The only reason people support Prop E is because they have kids in the District, and they are trying to curry favor with the teachers & staff for the benefit of their children."  I've seen this argument presented a few different ways, but that's the essence of it.  

There are several problems with this argument.  First, it requires you to assume that a child's teachers are paying any attention at all to what their parents are doing; that's certainly not my experience.  Second, it requires that every teacher in the District thinks Prop E is a good idea, which I know is not the case.  Third, it assumes a teacher will... well, do what, exactly?  Issue free homework passes for Prop E supporters?  Add extra points to a low test score? Excuse the child from class?  

I don't like the idea of paying any government any more than I have to.  In fact, the best word is probably "resentment" for how I feel about it.  But I don't really resent the District; Sacramento's Local Control Funding Formula is the culprit here.  Having attended several District workshops and a few of our State representatives' meetings on this issue, I've concluded there isn't another answer that wouldn't cost more, or erode our school district's effectiveness.  It has nothing to do with my kids' relationships with their teachers; I support Prop E because it's the best of a range of lousy alternatives.  

But I'm curious, Mr. Schwartz; what do you propose the school district does, if not Prop E? I've read your post on here; what's your idea for preventing damage to our schools' quality level, since it's such a significant driver on our property values? 

Comment by Erin Grady Brown on April 28, 2014 at 1:02pm

I think my favorite new "no" idea involves kicking a bunch of elderly people out of their homes to sell a big chunk of land to developers. Has anyone spoken to the residents of the retirement home to see how they feel about that idea? 

Comment by Mayor Casey Tanaka on April 28, 2014 at 1:31pm
Not only would such a plan be cruel to seniors, but I suspect that the lease provisions would make it a non-starter financially.
Comment by MIKE GAPP on April 28, 2014 at 1:41pm

Miss Brown, I don't think sales of the land would affect the long term leases on that land, so your view doesn't seem to be valid at this point. If the land was sold, the leases would be attached presumably, so a change in ownership would not adversely affect the long term lease holder, this "bunch of elderly people" as you referred to them.

That said, I wouldn't recommend selling the property at this point in time

However, speaking of things financial, what is striking to me is that, given that property's arguably poor management, and the history of bankruptcy of at least one Prop E supporter in the school administration, why do we think that they will do any better with more money handed to them? How is this oversight board not filled with cronies?

Note the fifth paragraph in the linked article.

http://www.utsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080508/news_1mi8felix.html

It seems like rewarding failure to me.

....I can hear all the thrice-wedded marriage counselors objecting already....

What a racket.

.........

As to Mister Casey's statements, I applaud them, and he shows remarkable measure of the situation. I would encourage him to continue in the way that he demonstrates that his fine mind can, by comparing what homeschoolers in Coronado do, in comparison to Public Schoolers. My ten year old homeschooler, farmed, played tennis, swam with seals (the fuzzy ones without automatic weapons), drew and identified the animals she saw while doing further research on them, learned violin from a tutor, discussed drafting techniques in Renaissance artwork, had a science lab, studied Latin, learned world history THIS WEEK, for about a TENTH of what a lesser education at CUSD would cost.

And, oh yeah, we do it at no taxpayer expense.

While achieving similar or higher test scores.

....It's Apples and Apples.

Now, Friends,...

I do not argue that homeschooling is for everyone, although the droves of families that we observe fleeing from CUSD and into home education models would seem to support that, but rather I ask this discerning readership to consider that the current public school model, as well as its culture, does not show ethics, frugality, or value in a quantifiable abundance.

And why would we reward that?

Results are achievable with much less funding. We've demonstrated that.

PROP E, even if it actually did what it claims, will not help, but rather feed the entitlement addiction that has gripped this entire country.

Must we wave our hands at the obvious once more...?

If you don't know how to do it, get out.

That's a solution.

Mike Gapp

Comment by Aaron Schwartz on April 28, 2014 at 2:12pm

Ms. Brown, You obviously miss the point.  This is another example of emotion over reality.  CUSD NEVER should have entered into such a bad lease deal.  Now, the property owners are asked to cover for their bad decisions.

There are other options, as Mr. Tanaka (sorry, but for purposes of this forum and issue, I cannot refer to you as Mayor because I find it offensive, if not a conflict of interest to post, listing you as Mayor, when you work for the school district who supports this issue and from which you stand to benefit.) is correct, the lease terms would prohibit such a move - read the lease.  The land could still be sold, however (but the district doesn't see a need to determine it's current value - see Jeff Felix quote on other posts), or a loan could be taken on the land.

Who knows how long the new state funding plan will remain?  I am sure no one in Coronado, if anywhere.  So, why not mortgage the property and cut the fat in the district and try to live within your budget - wow, what a concept.

Comment (keep it clean & on topic)

You need to be a member to add comments. It only takes 60 seconds to join. Get breaking news alerts!

Join Coronado Island (eCoronado.com)

Support Local Business

Advertise on eCoronado.com

Advertise on eCoronado.com

Live Web Traffic

© 2014   eCoronado.com

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service