[Unregistered]

From the KQED link on the other article, Prop 30 is about more than K-12. If it fails, UC and CSU will lose $250M. Ok, that sounds bad, but the Chancellors make $500K a year. Certainly there are some cuts available there. Prop 30 also ensures local police funding. Local police in many communities retire with pensions of $200K or more, then turn around and collect a public employee salary in a neighboring city. There is plenty of cutting our state legislature needs to work on before any cuts should touch our students. Maybe that should be our focus, rather than more money, money, money.

Prop 30 raises income taxes on couples earning $500K/yr, but also sales tax 0.25% on all of us. No thanks.

[Unregistered]

voters will be confused and both will fail as a result

agree with previous comment....i need to see real reform before i pony up more $$$

[Joe Friday]

I am not pretending to be an expert in any of this. I may be more confused than most of you. I see some general trends in attitudes, i.e. "the system is messed up - we are being manipulated by scare tactics to vote for something OR ELSE there will be huge cuts to education". I have heard this stated at the local level repeatedly with respect to LGUSD in the last year.

But, assuming that your kids are going to stay in California's public education system, what's the best approach to take? There does seem to be some sense to keeping one's dollar local. Psychologically, though, we pay our taxes once a year, begrudgingly, without knowing or worrying WHAT exactly that money is going for (as if you have any choice). And if some of that comes back into the public education system, that's fine, but I don't think anybody really has a figure in mind as to what their annual state tax tab was for local public education.

However, when LGEF or H&SC come a-knocking, some people contribute, and others complain about administrative overhead and so on. Is sending your kids to private school a panacea for all such ills? The skeptical part of my mind (which is most of it) says that private schools cannot be perfect simply because they have a different funding model.

[Unregistered]

As I understand it, the budget that was just approved by our legislature assumes that Prop 30 will pass, that is, it is based on the funding being there from Prop 30 passing, and if Prop 30 doesn't pass, there are cuts slated to happen. If Prop 30 doesn't pass, the legislature will not be going back to the drawing board to consider which things to cut, they will implement the cuts that have already been decided. It seems to me, our only choice as voters is to look at those cuts, if we feel we can't afford the tax increase, and decide if we can accept them or not.

[Terry McBriarty]

If prop 30 fails the results will be fairly immediate and catastrophic. It is my understanding that it wont affect LGUSD's current school year but cuts along the lines of 1.4 million would have to be made for the following school year, and barring big changes the cuts would be permanent and more would probably follow. I am not sure exactly how the failure of prop 30 would affect other districts but some districts will have to make immediate cuts for this school year. Bigger class sizes, shorter school years, program cuts. Is prob 30 ideal or perfect? Probably not, but for right now the benefits outweigh the costs as far as I can see. A tiny jump in sales tax? More income tax for those making over 1/2 million a year?

I will also vote yes on 38, so as not to "split the vote." If both measures pass the one with the most votes will go into effect. It was not clear that prop 38 would give any immediate relief to LGUSD but I dont want to see the whole public school system fail. Perfect? No. But these are the present options.

[Unregistered]

we have been told many times in the past to offer up more money or face catastrophe. i no longer respond to threat propositions. the threat is always the same - that state govt may finally have to embrace meaningful reform

my guess is the sun will rise the day after the election regardless

[Unregistered]

If we vote no then the state will learn a new phrase "how to cut pensions that equal full pay!" Vote no on both!

[Terry McBriarty]

Uh sure the sun will rise tomorrow.

Class sizes have already been creeping up. Cuts were made last year and the shortfalls were made up by parent dollars. Anyone who believes that the failure of these two propisitions will be a wake up call to the state? They have no problem with 45 kids to a class and 150 instruction days for a school year. The children of CA will pay the price. Right now we are 47th in the nation for per pupil spending. You think the government will wake up when we are 50th? What will these propositions cost the average person? .25% on sales tax? That is too much to gamble on our childrens education? That is sad.

[Unregistered]

We should let the state govt go bankrupt and just take are of our own kids through local programs like LGEF. Our sch ools will not see the tax revenue because it will get wasted on bureaucrats and hopeless schools in Oakland.

[Unregistered]

Uh sure the sun will rise tomorrow.

Class sizes have already been creeping up. Cuts were made last year and the shortfalls were made up by parent dollars. Anyone who believes that the failure of these two propisitions will be a wake up call to the state? They have no problem with 45 kids to a class and 150 instruction days for a school year. The children of CA will pay the price. Right now we are 47th in the nation for per pupil spending. You think the government will wake up when we are 50th? What will these propositions cost the average person? .25% on sales tax? That is too much to gamble on our childrens education? That is sad.

but terry you are evaluating these propositions in isolation, not in their context. the proper context is decades of mismanagement, a state govt that thinks it can operate like a federal govt (which can print its own currency), failure everywhere over what expanding the role of the state means (not more schools, just more prisons and CHP windfalls), and an ongoing failure to deliver on any of the promises of the past propositions.

if i were a trillionaire and the state needed a nickel to keep going the way it is, i wouldn't give it to them. and i'm a classic tax-and-spend liberal. we've all known california has been in dire need of meaningful reform for years...decades. now is the time. someone will be made sad by reform, that is always the case. maybe some people need to be sad for a while.

[Terry McBriarty]

So unregistered at 10:18 do you currently have a child or children in the public school system? Are you one of these people who "will have to be sad for awhile"?

So by voting no for things that we think are important like education we are actually voting "yes" for meaningful reform? How do you figure that? Can you explain this theory to me a little more? Because I disagree, as I believe I previously stated. The idea that more education cuts will somehow be the straw that broke the camels back and wake up who? The politicians? The voters? What is the mechanism that will bring about this meaningful reform? Will it look more like the Civil War, Occupy Wall Street, or the Boston Tea Party? Because that would be great but I don't see it on the menu. You think you are saying "no" to politicians and smacking away their greedy little hands. They don't care about these propositions. They have bigger fish to fry. Those of us with children in the public school system or who care about the public school system in general care about $$$ and public schools. So where this idea that a "no" vote for funding for our schools is a "yes" vote for economic or pension reform? While to you they may be connected, and maybe in some theory they are, but I am talking voting day reality check here. Vote NO and NOTHING will change, maybe you will somehow feel like you sure showed those blood sucking politicians, but they won't care. I hope we don't have to find out because it will be sad, but apparently that is what some people hope for.

[Unregistered]

Folks, it doesn't matter whether these propositions pass or not. Only 2% of LGUSD budget comes from the State now....and it seems clear that it's headed for 0% sooner or later.

The only way to have good schools in town is to fund them locally.

[Terry McBriarty]

That funding does make a difference. And perhaps in LGUSD resources are available to makeup shortfalls but these propositions are about the entire state. Not everyone has the resources LGUSD has. Our picture could get even uglier if these props fail and the funding mechanisms are later changed because many argue that basic aid districts like the LGUSD have more than their fair share of the pie and it needs to be shared with the have nots. While in theory everyone should be entitled to great educations we are 47th in the nation in per pupil spending, so spreading this meager funding throughout the state will just bring us all down to one deplorable situation. Things can get a lot worse. It does matter.

[Unregistered]

"We should let the state govt go bankrupt and just take are of our own kids through local programs like LGEF. Our sch ools will not see the tax revenue because it will get wasted on bureaucrats and hopeless schools in Oakland"

That's a great attitude! I hope you can build a wall high enough for your kids to live safely while the rest of the kids in California are undereducated...

[Unregistered]

I'm voting no on the Propositions because we all pay too much in taxes already and I'm frankly tired of people thinking they are entitled to the same lifestyle no matter what their income level. There's a name for that: socialism. Couple corrections to the above: number one is that the income tax threshhold for Prop 30 is $250,000. This will affect many families in LG, because this applies to you and your spouse's combined income plus income from stock options and other investments. Number two is that the State doesn't give us much at all; last I heard it was about $400,000 a year, but guess what, they can take more away from our local property taxes, and that's exactly what they are going to do if Prop 30 fails, and the estimate is a reduction of approximately $450 per student. So, one reasonable cost benefit analysis you can apply, Joe, is whether you will be affected by the tax increase and if so, will your taxes increase more than $450 per student in the district. If so, then you should absolutely vote no.

[Unregistered]

they should use the $50 billion from the bullet train to pay for education.

[Unregistered]

Vote No on both Joe. Reform is needed and should have occurred first. No problem paying taxes but when your state refuses free Federal money from the "Race to the Top" grants because it's laden by teachers unions lining the pocket of politicians, the answer is no. Even if these two past it still won't be enough. Rising benifits and hefty pensions will out tap any of these measures. Simple band-aid to our real problem. Foolish ads showing music and art teachers supporting this as if these props will keep these electives in our school. We already don't have those fully funded by school only watered down versions funded by only a small percent of parents who give a dam. So far living in LG cost me higher property taxes, smaller home, pilfering of my hard earned money from H&S ($300 per kid), LGEF ($600 per kid), $290 k-8 parcel tax soon to be doubled, $49 HS parcel tax ( not so bad), two bonds or is it three, Kumon lessons and reading tutor (14,000 a year) and not mention the stuff I need to purchase for auctions so I can later buy it back for double the price. All this for mediocre education. Nope I am not funding any of those two props along with everything else.

[Unregistered]

The bullet train is closer to $100B. Nobody wants the train except the construction workers. On the other hand, everybody wants good schools. Jerry Brown is playing hardball with schools because he can.....he will continue to play softball with the train.

[Joe Madden]

I agree with many of the comments regarding lack of trust in the State. I also don't trust that this tax increase will benefit Los Gatos.

To be clear about what Prop 30 is really about: This proposition is about whether you want Jerry Brown to take more of your property tax money. The State only gives LGUSD $400K per year, but they will take $1.4M out of our budget (rough numbers)....this means that he is working out a way to take a bigger share of property tax money, reducing the amount that our schools get.

The million-dollar difference is the bigger issue here, not the tax increase. Unfortunately they are both tied up in the same proposition. Vote your conscience, but everyone should understand the mechanics of what is in there.

[Unregistered]

I agree with many of the comments regarding lack of trust in the State. I also don't trust that this tax increase will benefit Los Gatos.

To be clear about what Prop 30 is really about: This proposition is about whether you want Jerry Brown to take more of your property tax money. The State only gives LGUSD $400K per year, but they will take $1.4M out of our budget (rough numbers)....this means that he is working out a way to take a bigger share of property tax money, reducing the amount that our schools get.

The million-dollar difference is the bigger issue here, not the tax increase. Unfortunately they are both tied up in the same proposition. Vote your conscience, but everyone should understand the mechanics of what is in there.

My conscience says vote for him taking property tax. Reform is needed and if people don't like the grab in parcel tax then vote your opinion for change. Milking of middle class is not the solution, you need to save for college, increased property tax and some music lessons for Johnny. Don't be fooled. LG will no money, put your money in a higher parcel tax instead.