Letters

 Click on the title and author to see the article.

Don’t Compromise on Education --Anita Bloch

I am writing this as a parent, a volunteer, a taxpayer and a politically-engaged citizen.

We need to pass both school parcel tax measures on June 2. QUALITY EDUCATION IS A PRIORITY.

We can’t afford to wait for needed reforms in the state education funding process. And we can’t count on the federal government giving money to our high performing district.

Our Piedmont schools have been back-filling a bigger and bigger hole that is due to the state budget priorities, and from having to comply with unfunded state and federal mandates. This is not the fault of the School Administration or the School Board. This is the reality of being a small, high performing district in a big state with a diverse population.

This will be my 3rd parcel tax campaign as a parent volunteer. In 2001, the parcel tax revenues were approximately 15% of the PUSD budget. Now in 2009, this figure is 27%. This is NOT due to expansions in the district's budget. This is due to continued cuts in funding from state and federal funds.

I have read in the Post suggestions that the School District needs to tighten its belt. But the fact is the district has been tightening its belt for years. We are just trying to keep our program going. Music, Arts, Counseling and Librarians are not “fat;” these are critical elements of a quality education.

Voting YES on both parcel tax measures is our town’s stand against a race to the bottom led by our State.

We start cutting programs and creeping up class size, and we start the downward spiral; programs don’t come back. The faculty moves on to private schools; we lose institutional knowledge. A decline in the schools’ reputation negatively affects the value of our homes.

I think the Parcel Tax Committee and the School Board acted very responsibly and conservatively in the proposed ballot Measures.

I encourage any of you who have doubts to contact the Parcel Tax Co-Chairs and/or Connie Hubbard and go through the details of the proposed tax measures and the budget.

We need to pass BOTH Measures on June 2. We need to show that our community supports our students and supports quality education.

We all should write our legislators in Sacramento and DC. We stand for our students – and for our future!

Criticism of B&E, Teachers is Unwarranted --Anita Bloch

The recently published opposition to Measures B and E with the suggestion that this is a scare tactic and we should just re-convene in November makes me so angry I felt compelled to write this letter.

Next year, we will have larger class sizes -- that is a given.  We don't know which classes will be cut yet. Teachers upon receipt of their pink slips are already migrating to private schools for 2009-10.

I am also really concerned by the lack of sensitivity of some people who simply that our teachers "don't do their job well²; or "are over-paid." How it must feel to do a job that one loves, not for the paycheck, but for the dedication to the profession and then read these attacks?

We don't have the volunteer bandwidth to try and mount another election in November. Parents need that Fall timeframe to raise money for the Annual Campaign ­ an additional $1.5 million over and above the parcel tax.

By law the parcel tax money stays local. Rather than trying to hijack this election, I urge the opposition to get involved with the Budget Advisory Committee, Citizens Oversight Committee and some Sacramento lobbying groups.

We can't run away from the facts -- 2009-2010 is going to be bad and 2010-2011 even worse  -- and this is with the parcel tax (both Measures passing). Our state economy is in downward freefall and with the Governor¹s initiatives failing; we can look forward to even more cuts.

I am urging, pleading to make sure every voter in your household gets to the polls on June 2, or sends in their absentee ballot and Vote YES on BOTH MEASURES B and E.

B&E: Good for Schools, Good for Community -- Chad Olcott, parent and owner, Mulberry’s Market

For Laura and me, there is no better place to live and work than Piedmont. ... As the proprietors of Piedmont's "meeting place" we have a unique vantage point when it comes to important community-issues.  All day long as our friends and neighbors come through our store we have the opportunity to engage in conversations about the issues and concerns of Piedmonters. Some of these are longer, more meaningful conversations over a cup of coffee, and other times, the subject is compressed into a brief chat, a knowing gesture or even a nod. No matter, we’re lucky to be at the vortex of these casual yet deliberate conversations and to see them through a lens that magnifies all sides of the debate.

Since opening our store we've been blown away by how committed Piedmonters are and how willing we are to express our opinions (let’s face it, Mulberry’s would not exist if it wasn’t for the generous and ardent voices of the community to help us overcome the many obstacles confronting us two years ago). This is why Laura and I feel it is time for us to express our opinion and wholeheartedly support Measures B and E. 

This town thrives because we have the enormous benefit of great schools which attract very committed families. Each year new families pay a premium to move into our town because they want their children to attend one of California's best school systems. And each Sunday, I watch and listen as Realtors and their clients chat over a cup of coffee at Mulberry's – almost always discussing the same thing, Piedmont's excellent schools!  I make it a point to introduce myself to these families who are so eager to move here and when we get to talking about Piedmont I find myself undoubtedly evangelizing our schools as the heart of the community. These families want to know if Laura and I and our children are having a good experience.  Fortunately, I am able to enthusiastically answer "yes" that our children are experiencing a top notch school system full of caring committed teachers that are supported by an army of dedicated parents and grandparents.

Other communities may falter during these challenging economic times cutting corners to save money and allowing their towns to deteriorate and suffer long drawn out consequences along the way.  But our faith in Piedmont leads Laura and me to believe that our town will once again do the right thing a pass Measures B and E ensuring our great schools stay great and that our community stays strong.

Quality Education Depends on Local Funding – Barbara Giuffre, parent and board member, Piedmont Educational Foundation

I strongly support both Parcel Tax measures on the ballot. Education is important to me, both for our community's children and our community's property values. It takes money to support educational quality.

The State, staggering under the weight of its massive budget deficits, is providing less money to the Piedmont School District, and we haven't yet seen the bottom. In the breach, we as a community need to step it up and pay for the programs we want. Piedmont as a community holds high expectations for our schools. We all want our children to have great opportunities to learn, compete and flourish.

It's a myth that we can cut costs further and still maintain educational quality. The School District now runs fairly lean. Teacher pay is not excessive. Health care costs, a national problem, are also a problem here; it's fair to say that they will have to be addressed, but certainly not by failing to approve the Parcel Tax measures.

The pink slips that have gone out have broken my heart because I personally know some of the talented and devoted contributors in the District who have received them. It would be a deep loss to the community if they are forced to go because we vote down Measure E's Parcel Tax. The pink slips that have gone out are a tiny fraction of the losses we will have to endure if Measure B, which renews the existing Parcel Taxes, does not pass.

There is one main distinction between Piedmont and the East Bay communities that surround us: our public schools. It's not an option to deny community support to our schools.

Community, Schools Draw Families to Piedmont -- Maria Carson Breber

My family moved to Piedmont four years ago because of the schools.  In a state where funding for education is terribly broken (and the root cause of the problem), Piedmont stands out as a community willing to support our schools and students through our parcel tax and private giving.  

California’s woefully inadequate funding of education causes our state to be ranked one of the worst in the country at 47th out of 50..  To add insult to injury, due to various state rules, Piedmont actually receives less money/student than many districts in California, including our neighboring cities (Oakland and Berkeley).  Therefore, it is no happy accident that our schools are so successful or that our Piedmont High School was ranked #64 in the country last year and received a “gold” ranking (the highest ranking for turning out “college ready kids” by US News & World Report.  It is the investment that we make through our parcel taxes and private giving, that money raised and spent locally, that enables the elements of education that make our schools better – the AP classes, smaller class size, foreign languages, occupational therapists, counselors, classroom aides, etc. These things should not be luxuries, enabled only by funding above and beyond the state funding, but in California they are.

I have been so impressed by the wonderful commitment of my children’s teachers.  They have been exceptional in their skills and their dedication.  I have also been inspired by the extraordinary contributions of parent volunteers who do everything they can to help our kids and schools thrive.  I am grateful to live in a community that places such value on education and I am hoping that Piedmont will continue its proud tradition of supporting parcel taxes and vote yes on Measures B&E.

Parcel Tax Appropriate to the Moment --Robert Crown, Wildwood Dad’s Club member

There’ve been a lot of suspect statements from opponents of the parcel tax in your paper, but I’m especially struck by their complaining about the tax tripling over the last decade. What does this have to do with the current campaign? In past elections voters passed increases in the tax because they wanted to make up for declining state revenue and keep our schools strong. That’s not a reflection of anything bad – quite the contrary, it illustrates community support for our great schools. This community draws newcomers from around the Bay Area primarily because of our schools and our property values remain strong in proportion to our school’s reputation for excellence.

Measures B and E also reflect the mood of the moment. Measure B is a simple renewal with absolutely no increase when it starts (in fact, since it doesn’t even cover inflation growth, it’s really a one-year cut in funding to the schools). Measure E is a modest short-term tax to help cover big state funding take-backs. But even if E passes there will be significant teacher layoffs and budget cuts.

In other word, these taxes are appropriate for the current environment in town. Just as the earlier parcel taxes were appropriate – and reflected the community’s desire – when they were passed. To say that parcel taxes growing over time indicates anything else is disingenuous and more than a little deceptive.

Piedmont is Unique --Lisa Gardner

Actions speak louder…Let it B+E!

Refusing to live in fear of the deficits in our school budgets, I will believe in, and work for, our children’s future. Like many before us who volunteer to raise money for schools – I can say it is no easy task. I applaud the founders and supporters of parcel taxes in their quest to bring funding for Piedmont schools.

I witness the benefits of supporting Piedmont’s public schools, and ask you to join me in voting for B and E as an equitable way to support OUR community. Taxes upset those that oppose them, I think we agree supporting our children is a priority, and the proposed taxes seem to be a reasonable solution.

To anyone on the fence, I say: “There is only one Piedmont, California”. There are things that set us apart from anywhere else in California, and dare I say the world…besides views of the bay and they are:
1)awesome community,
2)fantastic surroundings (love Oakland!),
3)outstanding public services, and
4)great public schools!

Vote. Choose B and E to maintain the education for OUR future- children of Piedmont, and the world-who are my bottom line.

School Spending Facts --Ray Gadbois

I am writing as an individual member of the Board of Education, former co-chair of the School Parcel Tax Committee and long-time member of the Budget Advisory Committee. Funding for public education in California is complicated and confusing. As we debate the details of local spending and taxes, we sometimes lose track of the big picture. So I feel compelled to provide some high level information to help voters evaluate our funding for education in Piedmont.

Unfortunately, spending on public education in California is consistently below the national average, despite the fact that our cost of living is much higher. For example, in 2005/2006 (most recent data published by the NEA), the average expenditure per student in the US was $9,100. California spent an average of $8,486 per student, below the national average. More importantly, our state funding was far below other large, high cost states such as New York ($13,551), Massachusetts ($12,596), and Connecticut ($12,436).

To analyze spending in Piedmont, we have to use information published by Ed-Data. Using this data for 2005/2006, the average unified school district in California spent $7,854 per student. Without benefit of the School Parcel Tax and local fundraising, Piedmont would have spent about $7,050 per student. We get a lot less from the state than other districts who receive need-based funding. But thanks to the support and generosity of our community, we spent $9,600 per student. This is more than the state average, but less than many other districts. For example, our total spending was about the same as Oakland ($9,460), but less than Berkeley ($10,478) and Palo Alto ($11,922). Data from the last two years shows a similar pattern, although the numbers are partially skewed by one time categorical funding and expenses.

Compared to the cost of education locally and nationally, our level of spending is reasonable and has been tightly controlled, with an average annual growth rate of about 4% in the past 10 years. The bottom line: funding we receive from the state is inadequate to pay for a quality public education, including a full range of programs, smaller classes, and qualified teachers. The School Parcel Tax, in conjunction with local fundraising, is needed to fill the gap. Still, in this time of economic turmoil, we are not asking taxpayers to fund the entire deficit. Even if both parcel tax measures are approved by voters, we will need to reduce spending to balance the budget, including layoffs for teachers and staff.

I want to thank the community for a long history of support for our schools and hope this support will continue in the future.

PUSD: Fiscally Responsible --Cathie Geddeis and Ray Gadbois

It is appropriate to question whether our parcel tax dollars have been effectively managed by the school district.  Some very simple statistics tell the entire story: despite the roller coaster history of the state's education funding, our district has managed to control costs --and continues to deliver an outstanding educational program.

Almost 90% of our district's current budget is spent on personnel costs; thus, the biggest drivers of the district's financial stability are head count and level of compensation.

Head Count: The district's headcount has remained flat over the period 2001 through 2008 (technically, the number of classified employees has dropped by 3 and the number of full-time equivalent certificated staff has increased by 3.7), while K-12 enrollment during that period declined a negligible 100 in total.

Compensation: Where do we stand today in terms of teacher compensation? The district's midpoint salary for certificated employees was $64,198 for 2008, compared to $67,889 for all Alameda County unified districts and $69,393 for all California unified districts (California Department of Education 2007-2008 Form J-90).

School finance accounting is complex, even to those of us who are bean counters by profession. For instance, any spending analysis must take into account the impact of state restricted funding and non-recurring money, which are often one-time funds, must be used for new purposes, and aren't available to offset existing expenses.

The bottom line, however, is simple - the district's budget is all about people. On that basis, our dollars have been well spent.

Investment in Education Yields Rewards --Cathy Girr

I am writing in support of Measures B and E. The benefits are clear—a continuation of the excellent public education which is a hallmark of our community, and an important factor in the quality of life we all enjoy whether we have school-age children or not. The costs are also clear—Measure B continues our existing parcel tax and will not increase taxes. Measure E is a three-year tax of less than $5 per week.

Frankly, I’m surprised by the controversy surrounding these measures, and by suggestions that Piedmont schools are already “too good” and that the costs are too high—especially after the vote to approve two new undergrounding districts at a cost of $7.1 million to be shared by the households of those districts (with an additional $142,552 from the city). I would hope that maintaining the excellence of our schools is an equally important expenditure. Our family chose Piedmont because it is a community that values—and has been willing to invest in—education. By working together to pass Measures B and E, we can ensure that the quality of our schools, and of our community, continues undiminished.

Local Funding Makes Schools Competitive -- Mahvash Hassan and Alan Siqueira

In the fall of 2006 our family moved from Lexington, Massachusetts in search of that rare community in the Bay area - one that believed in and supported an excellent public education that rivals any town in the Northeast.  We found that in Piedmont and opted to stay this side of the tunnel.  

Piedmont schools are competitive because of the breadth and quality of the programs that provide our children with a well-rounded education.

Piedmont schools are competitive because of the quality of the people who touch our children's lives everyday in the classrooms, libraries, gymnasiums, playgrounds, art rooms, science labs and school offices. 

Piedmont schools are competitive because the community provides 27% of the school budget through local taxes.   

Voting yes on Measures B and E is the right investment in our children's education and in the community.  

Academic Excellence, Property Values Linked --Eric Havian

In the debate over the parcel tax, opponents suggest that Piedmont has an unnecessarily “gold plated” public education program. Sometimes this is a reference to enrichment classes such as art, music, and language. Other times it refers to programs for more accomplished students, such as Advance Placement classes. Residents reminisce that they got a fine education, and perhaps were admitted to top universities, without such programs.

These are legitimate concerns, and deserve thoughtful answers. It is not enough to say “we need to preserve our property values.” How does education spending do that, and how strong is strong enough?

Piedmont competes with surrounding communities for upscale home buyers. If a family wants a high quality public education, there is no comparable choice on this side of the hills in the East Bay. Piedmont’s competitors are Orinda and Lafayette, whose schools offer the same sort of art, music, language, and AP classes that Piedmont will lose without a parcel tax. Prices are higher in Piedmont because Orinda and Lafayette are significantly longer commutes to San Francisco. As long as Piedmont maintains an education system that is comparable to cities that are less accessible to San Francisco, it will be able to command a substantial premium with home buyers. Take away that educational parity, and families will no longer pay extra to live here. Proximity to Mulberry and Fenton’s isn’t enough.

In addition, brokers will tell you that families who pay our stratospheric home prices generally place education at the top of their priority list. It makes sense. Parents with high income are typically successful, well-educated, and motivated (some say driven) to provide the best education for their children. Those kids might not be candidates for AP classes, but their parents will look elsewhere if AP classes are not even part of the curriculum. When they start going to Orinda for the better schools, Piedmont home sellers will face a shortage of well funded Piedmont home buyers. The resulting lower prices will affect us all.

So when we discuss the merits of a parcel tax that will only partially cover the loss of funds from prior years (assuming both measures pass), let’s not lose sight of what makes Piedmont such an attractive option for young families with healthy incomes. If our school curriculum becomes inferior to Orinda’s, those families looking for homes will not stop here on their way through the tunnel.

Critics Should Become Part of the Solution --Mary Ireland

Emotions are running high as the anti-tax brigade led by the increasingly negative-sounding Michael Rancor claims the school budget has run amok, and the pro-school funding crowd parries to defend our exemplary school system.

There are two sides to this argument and it’s clear that Mr. Rancor is an anti-tax guy (he worked hard to shoot down the city initiative several years ago). That, however, does not give credence to his desire to tar and feather those who understand the issues differently (apparently anyone who is pro-school funding lacks the ability to read and do math).

If he, along with the rest of the anti-tax brigade, is so fascinated with PUSD’s budget – and so much more brilliant and numbers-savvy than the rest of us – why do these folks not attend the Budget Advisory Committee meetings? (They are open to the public.) Why are these people not helping to problem-solve? PUSD is a public bureaucracy faced with unwieldy and often contradictory tasks: educating children in today’s expensive and increasingly competitive world (and pleasing everyone in the bargain) along with an uncertain – and decreasing -- flow of revenue (naturally - from Sacramento).

My husband and I are not so fond of paying taxes, and we too have asked questions about the district budget and the need for a Parcel Tax. But rather than looking to denigrate and take away support, we are galvanized into action by the difficulty of having to rely on the local tax base to maintain our superior educational program.

Along with an impressive array of talented and motivated citizens, we serve on boards; we go to the budget meetings; we listen; we raise questions; we help to brainstorm. We’re just citizens doing our part, like the countless others who are doing theirs to maintain something we’re all deeply invested in, imperfections and all.

So, please, join our efforts to contribute to our community and to our schools – and do your part by voting YES on Measures B&E.

Local Taxes Contribute to Community --Mary Ireland

As all the nuts and bolts of the Parcel Tax (budgets, real estate values, test scores, etc.) are being discussed ad infinitum these days, I keep feeling as though we’re missing the big picture – our community.

Community can be defined as “a group of people living in the same locality under the same government.” Yes, that is Piedmont.  But community is also defined as “sharing, participation and fellowship.”  Luckily for us, that is Piedmont too.  Because what is a town characterized by the former without the latter?  

Our town offers not only superior schools, and responsive police, fire and emergency services – the direct result of our locally levied and controlled taxes -- but also the “sharing, participation and fellowship” that is engendered by this investment in our community:  school musicals, local parades, seasonal festivals, block parties, neighbors who know and care about one another, and a local market where patrons are regularly chatted up by attentive staff.  

No one likes to pay taxes, but here in Piedmont the whole of what we reap is far greater than the dollars we sow.  And in the difficult times everyone is experiencing these days, it is a comfort to know that we are part of a larger community, bonded by our investment in and engagement with this place we call home.   Please vote YES on Measures B&E on June 2nd.

Schools and Real Estate Go Hand-in-Hand --Maureen Kennedy

I'm planning to support Measures B and E in the upcoming election, and urge other Piedmonters to do likewise.  As a real estate broker, I've been getting calls from families in increasingly cash-strapped districts interested in moving to Piedmont--they know we have a long tradition of support for schools, including parents active in the classroom, sizeable donations from parents, and parcel taxes from the community at large.

Each year I compare the price of "typical" Piedmont 3 bedroom/2 bath homes to that of 3/2 homes in neighboring Oakland communities.  The business-school style analysis (ask me for the spreadsheet) concludes that buyers were willing to pay $324,000 more for a Piedmont home in 2008.  We can assume that much of this increment is due to our nationally recognized schools because that's why so many of us, young and old, moved here originally.

If our commitment to schools starts to wane and school quality declines, the Piedmont real estate market may lose some of its luster, and with that the Piedmont premium. Reputations take years to build, but moments to lose.  By comparison to well over a quarter million dollars in added home values, the short-term, emergency parcel tax seems like a small price to pay. 

Jeff Wieler is Right: B&E is Good For Piedmont --Ward Lindenmayer

I just finished reading Jeff Wieler’s latest Piedmontage article, in which he discusses his own views regarding the two school parcel tax measures to appear on the June 2nd ballot – Measures B and E.

While I don’t always agree 100% with what Jeff has to say in his articles, this one was spot-on in terms of the clarity and simplicity of his arguments. As a result, I would be surprised (and disappointed) if anyone reading this column could not help but grasp what Jeff is saying since, as it put it himself, “it is simple economics” and “a no-brainer” into the bargain!

The distinction that Jeff makes between manufacturing and service industries, including how gains in productivity are measured in each and how each is affected differently by various cost factors is particularly apropos.

As for his comments about the value of a home in Piedmont (owing in large part to our excellent school system) versus the value of a comparable home in nearby Oakland (owing, at least in part, to Oakland’s struggling and mediocre school system), every realtor I know (and I know a lot of them) has been saying exactly the same thing for the past 30-40 years.

Finally, as Jeff also points out based on his own experience as a private school administrator, the price that a parent in neighboring Oakland would have to pay for a private school education that is in many (though not all) ways comparable to what Piedmont students are currently receiving, is a multiple of what Piedmont residents are asked to pay in the form of school parcel taxes.

For these and other reasons, I STRONGLY encourage everyone to vote YES for Measures B and E. It is the right thing for our students and it is the right thing for all homeowners.

PUSD: Excellent and Efficient --Joe Loduca, parent and president, Beach Parent Club

I read an opinion in the Post earlier that suggested, rejecting the parcel tax “will force the district to fix its budget.” I don’t know of a district in the area that does more with as much or less of a budget than we do. In the latest comparisons that I’ve found (2006, for all districts), PUSD had operating expenditures of $9,638 per student on revenues of $10,973. Oakland had operating expenditures of $8,307 per student on revenues of $11,160. Berkeley had operating expenditures of $10,349 on revenues of $14,442. Palo Alto has operating expenditures of $12,004 per student with revenues of $13,350. As you can see, Piedmont runs a more efficient operation.

By SAT scores California is rated 34th, and by ACT scores, 43rd in the nation. And that is with less than ½ of eligible students taking the tests. There are 9 states that have a larger percentage taking the tests and still score higher than we do. Those include Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Hampshire which all had participation rates above 80%. In other words, their top 80% averaged better than our top 50%. That shouldn’t be the case. I had seen one letter in the Post weeks past that suggested that we will still do well above state performance standards without the parcel tax. With our national standing where it is – there is little solace to take in that judgment. Especially with today’s economy becoming increasingly transient and more global. We need to be competitive with everyone.

With regard to how much of my property tax goes towards parcel tax, I am envious of anyone whose base property tax is only twice their parcel tax. To me, that equates to a real bargain. I’ve lived in Piedmont for 10 years now, and my base property tax is 4 times my parcel tax. And believe me – my house is modest. Even so, it is still a small price to pay for what we get in return.

Former Mayors Support B&E and PUSD --Valerie Matzger, Michael Bruck, Al Peters, Craig Lundin

As former mayors, we write to urge Piedmonters to support our schools by voting “yes” on Measures B and E. Contrary to the repeated incorrect assertions of a past Post columnist, Measure B is not an increase in the tax rate. It merely continues the level of tax that we are paying now. It is a careful, conservative, and entirely appropriate approach to maintaining the existing academic program in the current economic environment. Measure E is an emergency, short-term funding measure that would partially offset the loss of funds from the state during the current economic emergency.

Importantly, we also want to express support for the school board and administration. Having overseen city budgets and having worked closely with the district in the past, we know that the PUSD runs a lean operation with a Superintendent who does the work of two administrators with the help of a small, hardworking staff. Any modest increases in school spending in recent years have gone right into the classroom – that is how our schools (and, in large part, our city) have earned their reputation for extraordinary quality.

Our school district, our teachers, and especially our students deserve the continued support of this community. We urge you to vote Yes on B and E.

Parcel Tax Has Long History in Piedmont --June Monach, president, Board of Education

Uncommon times call for uncommon measures. As we prepare for the upcoming elections, I would like to provide a historical perspective on the evolution of the school parcel tax and how it has shaped the future of public education in our town.

Stop by the district office board room, and you will see a framed photo collage of the original steering committee members who ran the “Funds for Piedmont’s Future” Campaign in 1983. Do the names Cameron Wolfe, Jr., Helen Breck, Ann Chandler, Deanna Davis, Tom Hecht, Dee Iglehart, Carol Leslie, Steffi Mooers, John Sanders, Barbara Sarkisian, Susan Smegal, and Gerry Stahl ring a bell? This is the “A team” of volunteers who paved the way for six successful parcel tax elections, where local funds continue to support the growth in high standards for public education in our schools.

With advances in technology, and the need to compete in a more global economy, preparing our youth for life in the 21st Century has raised the bar even higher. But since 1976, our district’s buying power for goods and services has been dramatically reduced. And as a result of the Serrano vs. Priest court decision, state revenues to districts like Piedmont have been constrained in order to equalize per pupil spending in our state. When faced with these financial realities, a group of visionary individuals made a commitment to fund a college preparatory program by asking the community to levy a local parcel tax.

What’s behind the historical financial trends being debated in anticipation of the June election? The primary drivers include more rigorous standards for teaching and learning in mathematics, science, and language arts; investments in library media services and technology; and community supported priorities to attract and retain teachers and support staff to deliver a relevant education to Piedmont students in an increasingly competitive environment, and to provide all students with a comprehensive mix of academic and elective offerings.

Are taxpayer funds being prudently spent? Absolutely. Each year the district balances its nearly $30 million budget, combing it by line item for cost savings, operating with a lean administration, adjusting staffing ratios based on enrollment, negotiating fair and competitive compensation with employee groups, and implementing a plan to reduce the workforce in the current economy – all within a mere 3% statutory reserve.

As we reflect on how far we’ve come since 1983, I think it is important that we continue to follow the lead of those community volunteers who worked tirelessly to maintain high standards of excellence for our children. We owe a debt of gratitude to these individuals and those who followed, for engaging the community to keep open the doors of opportunity for our children. Local parcel tax increases are a direct measure of a growing commitment to fund what it takes to prepare Piedmont youth for the challenges of the future. I hope you will join me and other enthusiastic supporters in renewing our commitment to public education. Each and every vote will count. Thank you!

What’s in a Reputation? --Sue Smegal

When I was growing up in Alameda, which back in the fifties seemed like a small town, I remember my mother talking to my sister and me about the importance of our reputations. She started when we were too young to know exactly what she was talking about.   However, by the time we reached high school, we were fully aware that some people had good reputations and some bad.  The doctor who saw patients free of charge during World War ll with the thought that people would pay him back when they could; he had a blue ribbon reputation.  We also knew about the girls and boys who had bad reputations, whether deserved or not.  But one thing for sure was that a bad reputation was hard to change and a good reputation could sink overnight.  So it seemed like my mother was right to want us to stay on the straight and narrow.

So what’s in a reputation like Piedmont’s? All of the young parents today looking for a place to raise their children research school districts.  They look up test scores, advanced placement classes, adult child ratios in the classroom, opportunities in music, the arts and athletics.  They look at the community as a whole to see how supportive they are of young people.   Right now, they like what they see.  Piedmont has an excellent reputation.

Citizens of our town support the schools through the Parcel Tax and private donations.  Twenty-seven percent of our School District budget is provided with local money through the Parcel Tax.  Money is raised here and stays here.  This kind of commitment sets Piedmont apart from other districts.

This reputation has been built over decades with thousands of volunteer hours, financial commitment on the part of parents and community members, and vision on the part of home-based leadership.  Just this fall alone, parents raised $1,200,000 in private donations, over and above the Parcel Tax.   

This commitment has allowed the School District to assemble a dedicated group of teachers and staff who are constantly working to improve their ability to meet the needs of all children.

So I ask the question.  Can we lose the reputation that has taken so long to build if we were forced to cut nearly 30% of the School District’s budget?   My mother would be the first to say, “ Yes, in the wink of an eye.”