I am writing to express the opinion I have heard from many school parents in Alameda as well as myself.  You must consider closing the smallest elementary schools even if the parcel tax passes.
 
I took part in the survey that asked if we think neighborhood schools are important.  Of course, they are, who wouldn't agree with that?  The survey did not, however, ask us if we would keep the smallest elementary schools open at the expense of important middle and high school programs.  It was a misleading, incomplete and unfair survey and it appears the district has based many of their "decisions" on the belief that Alamedans prefer small neighborhood schools at the expense of enriching and important middle school and high school programs such as specialty teachers for  music and art, counselors, AP courses and challenging high school graduation requirements..
 
As a citizen of this community and a parent, I resent the manipulation used by a survey designed to get the outcome a very few Alamedans would, realistically, agree with.
 
Somehow, I think the people in Alameda who do not care what happens to the middle and high schools in Alameda never intend on sending their children to public middle or high school.  After their children graduate from their small exclusive neighborhood public elementary school, their participation in the public school system ends, sending their kids off to Julia Morgan, Head Royce and other expensive private schools.
 
The rest of us are told that charter schools are an option if we are not happy with what has happened to our middle and high schools.  I beg to differ.  Parents, upon knowing what the district has in store for the public middle and high schools, have flocked to the charter schools in town adding their names to already long and growing waiting lists.  Charter schools are not an option for everyone.
 
Please consider the school kids in Alameda who will be attending the public middle and high schools, not JUST the elementary schools.  You can not consider decreasing high school graduation requirements, laying off specialist teachers and have untrained teachers teach PE, music, theater and sports, totally decimating the high school education of these kids and cater to the few who want to keep their elementary school that is right across the street.  Alameda is a small geographic area.  A school in the vicinity can easily be considered the "neighborhood" school.  Edison and Otis are very close together.  On the West End, many more miles separate the closest elementary schools.  Take a close look at the proximity of the elementary schools to each other in the east end. 
 
I also urge you not to approve Plan B as it stands.
 
I am appalled at the inequity of the last minute change in Plan B for the west end.  Do you realize that under Plan B the 7th and 8th graders on the east end will still "enjoy" the smaller neighborhood school experience while the west end 7th and 8th graders will be forced into whatever awaits them in a large combined middle/high school campus????   That the kids on the two sides of Alameda will be forced into a completely different type of education environment is - clearly - and -  blatantly - biased and unfair against the west end of Alameda.  The east end and west end middle and high schools should be treated as close to the same as is possible.
 
We should have been notified of this option in time to have discussion about this change to Plan B.  We feel this is another form of manipulation by the school district, to say, "sorry, we ran out of time and now have a deadline as to casting our vote."
 
Please know how your decisions are seriously effecting the already divided west and east ends and how it effects ALL Alameda school kids.
 
There must be a way, even with the way the parcel tax is currently written, that, if the parcel tax passes,  the smallest elementary schools can be closed to save middle and high schools specialty teachers, programs and graduation requirements.  Please make a plan to close the smallest elementary schools even if the parcel tax passes.  It is the only fair thing to do.

Parent 12/1/10

As a parent of a student in the Lum school district I am shocked! The new Plan B only benefits the Edison/Fernside schools and therefore maintains the property values only for those West of Walnut. To me this form of re-districting seems discriminatory and arbitrary: quality of education and quality of life in the neighborhoods East of Walnut will diminish.

I am suggesting the denigration of Alameda neighborhoods East of Walnut (specifically in 94501) due to a failing education system and what Plan B offers. The effects are cascading. For example; schools become overcrowded and are unable to serve students needs both in and out of class. AUSD schools suffer a loss in standing. There are no sports or after school activities to occupy students. The neighborhoods lose value in two ways: people move out because their property values diminish and neighborhoods deteriorate. In many cities across America, the deferred maintenance and shifting to a less affluent economic demographic that accompanies the massive changes Plan B promotes destroy neighborhoods permanently. Please research Time Magazine archives or The Journal of American Education to find specific citations.

Finally, in dividing the Plan B boundaries, the possible legal ramifications of such an imbalanced plan will surely be explored by those affected; despite the fact that the plan will be voted into effect. This will use more time and money that should be focused on the students of AUSD. The ramifications of Plan B affect all Alameda families and are far-reaching. How is this plan adding to the motto "Excellence and equality for ALL students?" Please explain all of this to us.

Parent 12/1/10

Thanks for a positive conclusion to a long and deliberate evaluation of kids needs and viable options.

We are trying to mobilize parents of Nea students to participate in the campaign, independently AND in conjunction w/SOS.

We may try to extend our efforts to other charter schools, as well.

If you have any thoughtful suggestions (or wild ideas) about motivation, organization, resources, specific activities, etc. - please pass them along.

Parent 11/30/10

Home from the board meeting and while I know there are still many open and unresolved issues to deal with, I am so pleased that you passed the parcel tax and we can now set our sites on passing it to avoid Plan B.

Parent 11/30/10

I really appreciated your website during this process- the survey, the comments page, the reminder emails about important dates, and your replies to emails. Those were valuable tools for the community to feel like they had an impact on the development of the parcel tax. Of course we can never have a perfect parcel tax, but no one should fault another for fighting and advocating for what they believe were important issues. It was a messy, but necessary, process. Now we move forward to get the tax passed.

Parent 11/30/10

While the vast majority of Alamedans would agree to the need for a parcel tax to offset state budget cuts, the current proposal repeats the mistake of Measures H and E by imposing a non-single roll cap.  This makes the tax regressive, moving the burden from large businesses (some effectively $.02/sf or less) to small businesses and homeowners.  By my estimates about $1.5 million in revenue is lost by the cap, and the same revenue could be raised by a $0.29 /sf rate, roughly a 10% savings to all except for the roughly 100 beneficiaries of the cap. 

This repeat will likely garner the same resistance, and unnecessarily puts the District’s financial stability and our children’s education at risk.

Albany and Berkeley do not cap their taxes. It is time for the few large businesses that own and profit from substantial island resources to stop getting an essentially free ride at the expense of everyone else. Alamedans have demonstrated they can see through corporate campaigns, but an unfair tax has already failed, and momentum is against it.

I beg you, don’t tear this island apart again. Drop the cap.

Parent 11/30/10

I want to thank you all for your tireless work over the summer and fall in reaching out to, listening to, and responding to the community’s concerns about our public schools. Thank you for putting together a new parcel tax; thank you for your efforts to ensure that the new parcel tax will be as equitable as possible.

We all realize that it is impossible to get 100% of the community to agree to all the details of this tax, or any other. There are things I would like to change about it; I’m sure there are things that each of you, as individuals, would like to change, but we need to remember that this parcel tax represents a compromise that is our best hope for all of our schoolchildren.  I gladly accept this proposed parcel tax and urge you to do the same.

I ask you, as our elected education leaders, to unanimously approve this parcel tax as is – please do not cut any more funding out of it, or we may find ourselves having to pursue Plan B after all (which none of us wants to do). I strongly believe that unanimous approval tonight will send a positive message to the community and will dramatically improve our chances of passing the parcel tax in March. I also ask you all to join me, and hundreds of others, in campaigning to pass it. 

As the parent of a 3rd grader and a pre-schooler, I want to maintain high-quality public education in Alameda for my kids, and everyone else’s kids. The community is looking to you for leadership in approving the proposed parcel tax, and garnering support to ensure it passes.

Parent 11/30/10

I  will certainly vote for this parcel tax....my little frustration....is that all should be included....Why do you exclude seniors and disabled? Don't we need the money....They have as much or moneythan I ...I have not had a full time job in 2 years....but I will vote yes...seniors have the same challengesnd I feel have the same funds we do...why do you exclude them? What is the point of excluding anyone?I have no children...but I know our property values will go down if we don't help...

Parent 11/30/10

Thank you for your time, passion and commitment to ensuring the ongoing stability and greatness of Alameda schools.  I was a Street Captain for Measure E, and I'm ready to do it again.  I will knock on those same neighbor's  doors and tell residents that this time, we are ALL working together to pass a parcel tax and that the Board of Education unanimously supported it because they know this is the only way to save the schools and preserve our wonderful island community.

Thank you in advance for giving this parcel tax your vote of approval in spite of the fact it is imperfect.  It is the last hope to do something proactive in the face of imminent cuts and closures and your leadership is what will make this possible.

Parent 11/30/10

I've approached many of our parents and they've all asked the same question, to which I have no answer. I'll paraphrase the question here in hopes of receiving a concrete answer from our Superintendent.

"How can I approach other residents and ask them to vote for a parcel tax if the 7-12 Encinal Scenario seems like it might happen even WITH a Parcel Tax?  How can I ask them to give money to maintain the East-end status quo?"

As I look at the "Final Recommendations" from Superintendent Vital, I see that "Secondary school choice programs, AP courses, and innovative magnet school programs are funded" with a parcel tax.  Please, help me explain this equivocal language to my potential volunteers:  Is the inequitable 7-12 configuration still a possibility WITH the parcel tax?  Or, does passing a parcel tax completely remove the 7-12 Encinal High configuration from the drawing board?  I can't seem to raise any volunteers without a definitive answer.

I think people are worried the results of the parcel tax will be motivated by politics and not academics:  that a small but vocal group will benefit, particularly at the elementary school level, leaving the brunt of the cost to secondary schools.  In addition, Central Alameda and the West-end will, people fear, be forced to bear more than their fair share of the cuts and reap the fewest benefits of the tax.

So, I look forward to a concrete answer that I can take to my potential volunteers. I would like to commence a campaign they feel honest and comfortable promoting.

Parent 11/30/10

Thank you so much for all of your efforts related to the parcel tax. I appreciate your great concern, care and thoughtfulness, your inclusion of the community's concerns, opinions and recommendations. You have listened, made changes and responded.

As vocal as the community has been about the specific perspectives we consider important, we all realize you are faced with a difficult and challenging task. We all realize that the decisions you make will not make everybody happy. We realize that there is no silver bullet.

Now, it is up to you, the Board of Education, to make the tough decisions you've been elected to make. We need you to finalize, and unanimously pass, a parcel tax that is in the best interests of our children, community and Alameda's public educational system. Then we need you to vigorously campaign to pass the parcel tax since we all know that Plan B is not an option we want to pursue.

Your thoughtful structure of the parcel tax, as well as your unanimous approval this Tuesday, will send a positive message to the community and dramatically improve our chances of passing the parcel tax in March so we can turn our attention to making things better, rather than worrying about how bad they can get.

Now is your time to lead.

Lead us out of these difficult times and challenging circumstances. Keep Alameda public schools the place we go out of our way to place our children so they can get a high-quality education while enjoying their educational experiences.

Parent 11/30/10

I am writing to you today because I can not attend this evening's meeting.  I am very concerned that you are not sharing enough with the residents of Alameda with regard to what cuts will be made even if the parcel tax passes.
 
I am asking that you spell out precisely what changes are going to be made.  For instance, if the parcel tax passes are you still planning on making middle school a 6-period day?  What will that mean for those students, teachers, etc.  What oher changes/cuts will go into effect for the 2011-2012 school year?  This information will need to be disclosed for Alamedans to fully support and work to pass this parcel tax.
 
Also, are any schools being closed to keep this situation from continually happening year after year?  It is your fiscal responsibility to make the cuts that will keep our entire school system operating at the high level our children deserve and in the black.
 
As for the language of the parcel tax, I think it is a huge mistake to limit the money to only existing charter schools.  The parcel tax is public funds to be used for public school education - - charter schools are all public schools.  It would be unethical and perhaps illegal to exclude any children from receiving those public funds.

Parent 11/30/10

As an Alameda parent, I would like to see unanimous support from our school board on the parcel tax vote tonight.  We moved to Alameda because of the small neighborhood schools, but will not hestitate to take our kids out of the school district if the parcel tax does not pass.
 
Ms. Spencer, I understand that you may not be supportive of the parcel tax.  I hope you reconsider your position as it does not seem to fit with that of the majority of voters here in Alameda.  Your lack of support on the last parcel tax vote may have been what caused its defeat unfortunately.

Parent 11/30/10

I am writing to urge you to place the parcel tax on the March Ballot in 2011. I have two children, 5 and 3 and moved to Alameda last year for the schools. We love the city and morever love the Alameda schools. I am writing to state that we support a parcel tax and urge you to help us save one of this wonderful city’s biggest assets.

Parent 11/30/10

You owe it to all school children of Alameda to close the smallest elementary schools in Alameda before you consider closing and consolidating any middle and/or high school in Alameda.  It is known throughout the community that there are very vocal and influential neighborhoods loudly voicing their desire to keep their neighborhood elementary school open despite the effect it will have on all middle and high school students in Alameda for years to come.  And with the most recent last minute change in Plan B, this points to Wood Middle School and Encinal High School particularly. 
 
Many people voted No on E because the School Board had not done its share by showing good faith in closing the smallest elementary schools years ago.  Please make a move to be fair to the WHOLE community of school children.  Please give this new parcel tax a chance to pass by showing the community you have the wisdom to bypass politics and do the right thing by saving money where it is most obvious to the tax payers and that is closing the money wasting smallest elementary schools.
 
Close the smallest elementary schools before you consider closing and consolidating any middle school and any high school.  Give this parcel tax a fair chance to pass for the benefit of ALL Alameda school children.

Parent 11/29/10

Parent 11/29/10

Thank you for all your hard work you have done related to the parcel tax. The parents that have tirelessly attended the board meetings over the last 5 months urge you to unanimously vote to place the parcel tax on the March 2011 ballot – and then help us to ensure it passes.

Parent 11/29/10

As you vote for the final Parcel Tax structure, I encourage the Board to look to an educational system of possibilities, high student achievement, and growth in new and innovative areas. The only way to achieve this is by a unanimous vote tomorrow night with the highest per square foot fee and the highest cap tolerable.

It is imperative that we continue to communicate a vision of strong schools to the community and model unity in the fight to educate our children.

I would like to see the Board focus on achieving consensus and put a parcel tax on the ballot that will put us in the direction to meet these goals.

Stand united and firm and the community will follow.

Parent 11/29/10

Thank you so much for all of your efforts related to the parcel tax.  You have addressed a very difficult task with great concern, care and thoughtfulness.  You have allowed the community to voice their concerns, opinions and recommendations. You have listened, made changes and responded.

As vocal as the community has been about the specific perspectives we consider important, we all realize you are faced with a difficult and challenging task.  We all realize that the decisions you make will not make everybody happy.  We realize that there is no silver bullet.

Now, it is up to you, the Board of Education, to make the tough decisions you've been elected to make.
We need you to finalize, and unanimously pass, a parcel tax that is in the best interests of our children, community and Alameda's public educational system.  Then we need you to vigorously campaign to pass the parcel tax since we all know that Plan B is not an option we want to pursue.

Your thoughtful structure of the parcel tax, as well as your unanimous approval this Tuesday, will send a positive message to the community and dramatically improve our chances of passing the parcel tax in March so we can turn our attention to making things better, rather than worrying about how bad they can get.

Now is your time to lead.  Lead us out of these difficult times and challenging circumstances.  Keep Alameda public schools the place we go out of our way to place our children so they can get a high-quality education while enjoying their educational experiences.

Parent 11/29/10

As a Mother of four children in the Alameda Unified School District , my concerns are great on the upcoming parcel tax decision. I am 150% willing to pay and endorse this tremendous effort to keep our schools alive and well.

The wonderful school system that we all know and are a part of was one of the top 5 reasons we came to Alameda 12 years ago.  I do not want to be faced with moving to another community or the private sector when we can do what it takes to make this work.

In our household – plan B is just NOT an option. 

Your thoughtful structure of the parcel tax, as well as your unanimous approval this Tuesday, will send a positive message to the community and dramatically improve our chances of passing the parcel tax in March so we can turn our attention to making things better, rather than worrying about how bad they can get.

Now is your time to lead.

Lead us out of these difficult times and challenging circumstances.

Keep Alameda public schools the place we go out of our way to place our children so they can get a high-quality education while enjoying their educational experiences.

Thank you for your continual efforts to make this RIGHT for our community.

Parent 11/29/10

Community Member 11/29/10

Instead of a cap, which provides a large benefit to the largest landowners, have you considered instead a floor,  which would exclude the smaller landowners but include the largest.

Also, the flat rate for vacant land is again a violation of the equal application required by the State Consitution.  As a practical matter, it exempts all the parking lots surrounding lots of business parcels.

Instead of 35cents/sq ft with caps and floors, which may violate the state constitution, have you considered something like 15 cents a foot for everyone?
The favoritism being shown the largest commercial landowners continues to be a problem for the rest of the landowners.

Community Member 11/29/10

The compromise parcel tax is a real testament to the boards efforts to listen, and make a best effort to ensure its passing.

Parent 11/29/10

The success of the next parcel tax hangs on your ability to give the voters a sustainable plan. 

The decision to keep the smallest schools open when it is common knowledge among voters that they are draining our district financially is a mistake.  Last spring, voters were told that AUSD needed a 14 million dollar parcel tax to keep schools from closing.  It failed; no schools were closed.  Many voters voted no on E because they believe that some of the district’s smallest schools should be closed.  These same voters supported Measures A and H to give the district time to consolidate schools.  Most do not believe that keeping small, expensive schools open is a sustainable financial model for their tax dollars. Spending taxpayer dollars on facilities when all children can be well served in fewer schools for less money is a mistake.

Furthermore, continuing to prioritize small facilities which serve 10-15% of the students in AUSD over programs (such as the seven period day at middle school) which serve 100% of the students in AUSD is unfair to children and taxpayers.

The only parcel tax that stands a chance is one that prioritizes programs and makes cuts in facilities spending.

Staff 11/29/10

Would you mind explaining to me why the Parcel Tax would be used to fund Charter Schools?  Currently throughout the state, Charter Schools receive more money than school districts and it is the parents/guardians decision to opt out of public schools.  Alameda USD lost a lot of ADA when yet another independent charter school was opened this school year.  Charter schools in Alameda are all currently independent of the district and should not be dependent upon a parcel tax designed to support public schools.  It is bad enough that your hands are tied on whether to open a charter school, but your hands are not tied on whether to have funds supporting the charter school (ie, parcel tax funds).
 
Using parcel tax money to support independent charter schools is a big concern for unions and is the main reason why Oakland did not pass their parcel tax a few years ago.  Actually the unions in Oakland USD campaigned against the parcel because some of the money went to charter schools. I know this because I sat in on some meetings with the union since CSEA represents one of their bargaining units in Oakland.  I would not want to be put in a situation that unions could possibly run a campaign against the parcel tax for only 3-4% of the money brought in by the parcel. 
 
Personally, I would have a problem supporting a parcel tax that has any percentage going to charter schools and will bring that before our CSEA chapter when we vote on the parcel tax.  Please consider eliminating allocation of funds for charter schools.

Parent 11/29/10

How old is a “senior?” 

I get this question a lot.

Parent 11/29/10

The recap you provided contradicts the Alameda Sun article from last week which says the cap is $8500.
 
Also, you have a $.32/building square foot tax foloowed by a $299 per parcel tax (w/one or more buildings).
 
Can you clarify?

Parent 11/29/10

I wonder though if the district has presented proposed cuts, for any academic year, that will still be required even if/when the parcel tax passes? If so, can you direct me to it?

Parent 11/29/10

If the measure passes, does this mean that there will be no school closures or consolidation of schools such as the proposed 7-12 school at Encinal?

Parent 11/28/10

Which category is high school music/drama/art in?

Parent 11/28/10

I'm writing to ask that you give full consideration to funding special education with the upcoming parcel tax.  There has been a rumor circulating that special ed. is going to be short-changed relative to adult education and other less-deserving programs.  Hopefully this is not true.  But if not, I would like to remind you how excellent the current special ed. program and staff is in Alameda, and how this raises the overall quality of the school system. Please give full support to the special education programs and children with special needs in Alameda when you make your difficult decisions regarding the school budget.

Parent 11/28/10

I would like to go on the record in support of the the tax.

Parent 11/26/10

To think a new tax which would average over $1000./year for a property owner with a minimal, 4000 sq ft parcel would gain a majority support is unrealistic politically even if it were justifiable on the basis of a  plan to find another way to make the finances work.

Other governmental-type units are rethinking how they work, including pension modifications, work rule modifications, and re thinking how they perform their services.

For the first time in forty-nine (49) years of voting I would work against the proposed tax measure as described in this weeks news reports. 

I am a 70 y.o. retired resident of  Alameda.  I have supported education through taxes, parcel taxes, and donations to school support organizations.

I heard two current Board members four years ago say the District had no financial problems.  The next day the Journal reported that the district had a $2.5 million dollar deficit and was starting to look at ways to deal with it.  This did not inspire confidences.

Seeing a take it or leave it proposeal, I am prepared to leave it.

Parent 11/26/10

You ran on a platform that you would not close a neighborhood school.  I don't recall your flyers stating that as your one and only issue.  Why is that the only issue you will not change your stand on, and why are other candidates' issues, which some voters obviously agreed with,  not as important as yours?

Also, when the parents of your protected "small school" students say they cannot move their children to another site because they would no longer be with their classmates, they are not considering that their classmates will also be moving to the new site.  If they pull their children out of the school and move to another city, as they threaten, their children will not only likely be the only new student in a new class, but also the new child in a new neighborhood.  What would be more traumatic for a child - a new site with old friends, or a completely new atmosphere for their whole world?

There are many voters out here who are not in the  "target" groups you are trying to appeal to with your concessions.  There is a group who are just homeowners or renters, not business owners, those who do not attend classes at the adult school, who do not have children in Charter schools or small schools (as you are now calling them), or any school, for that matter, and who are not senior citizens.  Some of us feel that today's students should  have the same advantages as we had, and even more - broad educational opportunities so that they will be prepared to attend any college or university they choose.  They need to be offered athletic programs, fine arts classes, A.P. courses, and the opportunity to explore as many of these as possible, which will be impossible with a shortened day at the middle and high school levels.  You'd better consider us and our vote.

Staff 11/26/10

As a teacher in Alameda, I support the Parcel Tax, which is vital to the success of Alameda schools.  Please continue to put the energy necessary into making the Parcel Tax a success.

Parent 11/24

I voted in favor of the last parcel tax, and I fully support a new parcel tax.  The only problem that I have with the new tax is that it states that  25-26% will be used to attract and retain excellent teachers.  I have a problem with this because I see many great teachers have been given pink slips and let go from their positions because they lack seniority.  At the same time, there are poor teachers who are only kept on staff because of their seniority. 
 
I know of instances where teachers have formal complaints against them, yet they have been allowed to stay and continue to teach because of the fact that they have the seniority.  Other teachers, good teachers, have been let go because unfortunately they haven't been with the district as long. 
 
If we want to make our schools truly excellent then we need to stop allowing the teachers that are getting by on their tenure to continue to teach our children.  If we are going to pass a parcel tax that plans to allocate 25-26% on teachers, then we need to make sure that we keep the teachers that are working for our children and get rid of the ones that aren't.

Parent 11/24

In last night's discussion of whether secondary schools receive sufficient funding from the parcel tax, I think one substantial factual piece went unmentioned.  Just as high schools may have taken cuts this year in course offerings, elementary schools took cuts this year via the 20:1 class size being raised to 25:1.  We are not going back to 20:1 -- that is a cut that stays with us, and we know it has a real impact on educational quality.  So it is not accurate to suggest that elementary schools are being spared at the expense of secondary schools. It is also clear to me that several categories on the parcel tax priority list benefit students at both the elementary and secondary levels.
 
As someone who is interested in the quality of the entire K-12 experience, I believe we have to make smart investments at all levels, and we have to make compromises at all levels.  You have done a great job of running this process, collecting the broadest possible public input, and coming to consensus on a number of details based on what you heard from the public.  I believe you have a very fair recommendation from the staff in front of you, one that is very much balanced between impacts to elementary and secondary education.  Please move forward on it -- let's not sacrifice the entire forest in an effort to make fine differentiations between individual trees. 

I feel strongly that the failure of this parcel tax would have devastating consequences for education in Alameda at ALL levels.

Parent 11/24

I am the mother of two children that attend elementary school in Alameda.  We bought a house in Alameda a little over two years ago based on the reputation of it's school system.  Granted the community is excellent, but that has a lot to do with the tight knit families that live here.  Local businesses and housing should support the tax as well since our families support them financially.  If the parcel tax doesn't pass I think there will be a domino effect; current families will move out and new families won't move in and this will effect Alameda both socially and economically.  So please support a parcel tax.  It seems like our only feasible option at this point.

Parent 11/24

I watched, with interest, the Board members discuss and debate many issues before them last night.  I am somewhat dismayed and disheartened by what I heard.  You seem to  have your minds made up, and not be open to differing opinions.  What was written is what will happen.

As far as retaining small schools at the expense of the middle and high schools, I can't see your logic.  To offer so few options for scheduling elective courses at the high school level is so unfair to students hoping to get into a university or college.  To offer only five periods, and lower credit requirements to graduate gives our students less of a competitive edge when it comes to being accepted at colleges.  Maybe not at our neighborhood College of Alameda, but in the big world.  Many colleges want to see more than just good grades in core subjects.  Scholarships are the key to many students being able to move on to higher education.  You will be limiting their chances by not giving them the opportunity to participate in sports, music and drama.  I think some parents with smaller children might not be thinking of that at this time, but, when their children are in high school and they see what this budget and 7 year tax has done, providing small classes in grades 1-3 might not be their top priority.

As far as giving money to the Charter schools, I think Mr. Mooney stated it right when he said parents make a choice to take their students out of regular schools and they shouldn't expect to take money from the regular schools with them.  There are many parents who choose to send their children to Christian or Catholic schools, also.  You are not considering giving them 10%.  There seems to be some inequity here.

When Ms. Spencer spoke about spreading the pain over all grade levels, she was told that would upset all the percentages and plans that have been formulated.  But, Mr McMahon seemed to indicate that, if some making some changes in that regard would secure her vote, some areas could be addressed.  Going with the low percentage for each area of the plan, would give Ms. Spencer the extra funds she's seeking to protect programs parents have told her are important to them.  Ms. Vital said they could not do that.  I ask, why not?  Why put two different percentages, and then say only the higher one will work?

I realize you have put many long, hours of hard work into trying to find a solution to this budget problem, but be fair across the board, and don't say what you feel you have to say just to get the "yes" vote you want.

Parent 11/24

I am the parent of a first and third grader at xxx Elementary.  I have reviewed the Parcel Tax proposal and the alternate recommendations for school closures in the event that Parcel Tax funds are not available.  "Perfect Tax" seems to me to be an oxymoron, but the proposed formula and prescribed uses for a parcel tax represent a reasonable compromise in an extremely difficult situation. 

While I have supported previous parcel taxes, I have never done anything beyond voting and talking to neighbors casually.  For the election in March, I am committed to stepping out of my comfort zone and being a street captain.  It is imperative that we pass this tax, the alternatives without a parcel tax are too horrifying to contemplate. 

Thank you for your support of our schools and of your careful attention to the voices of the community.  Please come out strong in solidarity by unanimously passing this parcel tax and to showing the leadership necessary to get this parcel tax on the ballot and passed.

Parent 11/24

I am a home owner and a proud parent of a 1st grader at xxx Elementary.   I urge you to support a new parcel tax for our district and to vote it in on November 30. 

We moved to Alameda when our son was 1.5 years old.  We heard how great the Public Schools were and how nice and safe the neighborhoods are.  We sold our 2 properties in West Oakland and bought a home on the edge of the Gold Coast.  We are very happy with our decision. 

Happy until now.  If a parcel tax doesn't pass then what?  xxx will close, I guess,  and my son will be forced to go to a different school and make new friends all because a bunch of grown-ups in Sacramento (and beyond) can not make the best decisions for our future, our children.  I can not believe we are having to fight so hard for something that should be a birth right for every child in this country, an education.  Imagine India, they have no public education; is that where we are heading?

I know only a few families who have moved out of Alameda recently and more that are talking about moving.  For now though, only a few.  I'm afraid that number will be increasing if a parcel tax does not pass next year.

Parent 1123

I have been asked to write this letter on behalf of several parents and residents within the Alameda Unified School District and it should be read in conjunction with the letter regarding school closures that I previously sent you.
 
The proposal has many severe difficulties of which I will highlight only a few of the most egregious.
 
Why are you threatening to cancel all but varsity athletic programs, if a $12 million/year parcel tax is not passed, when the programs only costs 4% of $12 million proposed to be raised by the new tax? That is $480,000 which is nothing in an $80 million budget. I understand such a proposal as an unethical scare tactic; but public officials must be above proposing/suggesting unhealthy, unnecessary and educationally unsound “cuts” to scare voters.
 
Instead you must find other avenues. The obvious one is temporary salary reductions, as suggested in the previous letter, with a smaller parcel tax measure (one which raises $6 million, for example). The pain is then shared more equitably and less harm is done to homeowners, businesses, landlords and landladies on fixed income, renters who will see rent increases etc.
 
The economic problems of public schools are a long-term problem, as are the economic problems of the State of California. The Board must face, even if the Superintendent and the unions do not want it to, the ongoing problems of escalating costs of pensions and benefits, economic malaise, huge state government deficits, economic impoverishment due to previous fiscal and economic excesses etc. The answers are in reducing the cost of public education, not reducing the education of its children.
 
The language of the proposed Full Ballot Text of the Parcel Tax Measure has many problems but the most graphic is its definition of “Severe Fiscal Emergency or Changed Funding Conditions” which allows the Board to change the % of funds among the proposed programs at its whim. (See Ballot Purposes, Paragraph 1, and the definitions set forth just before “AMOUNT AND BASIS OF TAX”.
There are always “financial events that are out of the control of the Board of Education.” All revenues are outside the control of the Board of Education. Thus, a majority of the Board could declare an emergency whenever it over-budgets revenue or under-budgets expenses. A Board should certainly not be rewarded for adopting a disapproved budget by raiding monies that the voters taxed themselves for specific purposes at a specific percentage.
 
“Changed funding conditions” happen every year. The one thing that can be guaranteed is that the funding levels from the State and Federal government for specific programs will be different every year. Thus, the Board has a right, under this proposal,  to change the % to whatever a majority wants every year under this definition. Thus, the “percentages” proposed in the Ballot Measure are nothing but a shell game – a deception on the voters.
 
A recovery will eventually come and state/federal funding levels will be at or above the present level, probably within three (3) years. The Ballot Measure should have a provision that the tax will be for three (3) years unless funding levels do not reach 2010-11 levels, in which case it can be continued for up to seven (7) or until total funding levels exceed 2010-11 levels, which ever comes first.

Parent 11/23

I may not be able to join you at your meeting tonight. I continue to support a parcel tax. Getting more support from those who campaigned against the prior parcel tax (Measure E) is critical for success in 2011; especially our business community. I see that efforts are ongoing to engage this constituency.

I wanted to comment on your Board Agenda Item for tonight, Exhibit F-6. Thank you for spelling out in more detail where funds would go if a parcel tax is passed and where specific cuts will be if it is not passed. Voters need those details.

On page 15, 4% will go to athletic programs. I understand the value of this item -- many people will vote for the tax to keep sports. I dislike seeing this item in here because if the tax fails, the plan is to cut all HS sports in 2012. Education is always top priority, but frankly, I think more damage would be done by eliminating HS sports than by taking another furlough day (at the same approximate cost). I do concede that more furlough days are very hard on teacher's finances. Can this item be altered?

On page 10, 13-14% of funds allocated to small class sizes. Under without the tax, shouldn't a bullet point be added to say that there will be teacher layoffs? Isn't that where there actual $ savings come from? It may drive home the additional reality of increased class sizes.

On page 14, 15-16% of Parcel Tax funds will apply to restoring 5 days to the school year and professional development. That figure seems high (costly). That said, if you take $62.8M of 2010-11 budgeted salary/benefits x 2.8% = $1.76M. (2.8% is 5/180 school days). Not all salary and benefits are impacted with furlough days. Thus, the figure looks about right. I'm not questioning the accuracy of this figure, but suggest that the value/benefit of this item be emphasized proactively. It's the second largest allocation of funds and may get questioned.

The structure is imperfect, but appears more equitable to residential parcels than Measure E. (i.e. Variable cost for larger dwellings vs. flat cost for all regardless of size). I'm not a fan of the $8,500 cap, but, my hope is that it's a negotiation that helps the greater good -- passage of the 2011 parcel tax.

Will smaller commercial property owners be up in arms to see their parcel tax rate increase 107% from .15/square foot in Measure H to $.13 in defeated Measure E, to the recommended $.32 in the 2011 Parcel Tax?

I've done enough budgets, so I know the math needs to work, but, I trust representatives from that constituency has been consulted on this matter.

Parent 11/23

It appears that the school closures proposed for next year in case a Parcel Tax Measure is not passed will save only $2.455 million dollars while the recommendations will have a serious impact on student learning.
 
A temporary 5% across the board salary reduction would save approximately $ 3.5 million and would not necessitate any school closures.
 
I suggested such an approach a year ago when you were in negotiations with the teacher’s union. However, you chose to negotiate increasing class size rather than modest salary reductions in time of recession.
 
The AUSD School Board, the Administration and the teachers’ union all claim to put the interests of students first, yet their actions are to put themselves first. Yes, it would cause a little difficulty for a School Superintendent to live on $197,000 rather than $207,000. Yes, it would cause a little difficulty for a tenured teacher to live on $47,500 rather than $50,000.00.
 
But it would certainly cause less difficulty and education harm than laying off teachers and creating a grade 7-12 school at Encinal and closing Wood Middle School. Even these proposals would require negotiation with the teachers’ union and other bargaining units.
 
Rather than adopt this proposal, you should open negotiations with the unions on temporary salary reductions should a parcel measure fail; and the bond measure should be tailored to a shared hurt scenario rather than loading great additional financial burdens on a populace that is suffering from unemployment, economic recession, lost income, increased taxes and shrinking property values.
 
Public schools and public school employees must share the era of shrinking incomes and economic difficulties rather than seeing homeowners, landlords and businesses as golden geese that have an extra $600 or $6,000.00 to pay without difficulty.

Good leadership sacrifices first and then asks others to join the sacrifice. Please show the way by example, and ask the bargaining units to do the same. Then the voters will have no reason to doubt the sincerity and necessity of a reasonable proposal that is brought before them.

Parent 11/23

Are there any exemptions from this tax based upon property type, given the proposed parcel tax language?  I.e., churches?  Private Schools?  Non-profit organizations?  

Parent 11/23

I am an Alameda resident and parent with two children who attend xxx Elementary.  I have reviewed the summary of the parcel tax proposal prepared by Superintendent Vital and wanted to take a moment to urge you to vote unanimously in support of the tax on November 30.  I believe the tax is an excellent effort to address concerns raised by a small percentage of the business community.  Passage of the tax is essential to providing all of Alameda's children the highest quality education possible that will maximize their future opportunities and the future well-being of our community.

Parent 11/23

Unfortunately, I am unable to attend tonight's meeting, so I wanted to express my opinion and hope you take it into consideration.  I understand that you are going to decide whether or not to put a parcel tax on the ballot in March.  As a parent, with two young children in Alameda schools, I implore you to put the parcel tax on the ballot.  I have supported all previous parcel taxes in the past and will happily vote for another one in March to help fund our schools.

My husband and I moved to Alameda almost 10 years ago, before we even had children.  We knew we wanted kids, so we chose to move to Alameda from Oakland so we could send our future children to a good neighborhood school.  Our house is located two blocks from Edison, where we now have a 3rd grader and a Kindergartner. 

Our 3rd grader has faced many challenges in school being on the autism spectrum.  He has developed into a good student and a good friend, thanks to the support of his teachers, counselors, resource specialists and Edison's principal.  I do not believe he would have thrived in a large school environment or in a class of 30+ kids in these early years.  He could have easily slipped through the cracks in the system, that inevitably occur in large classes and/or schools.  This is why I firmly believe that we need to maintain even our small neighborhood schools, such as Edison and Franklin and am more than willing to pay for it.

Please give the voters another chance to show their support and help people understand that you are working hard to make the parcel tax fair even for business owners.  The public needs accurate information, so they understand that this is not the same tax structure that was rejected in June.

Parent 11/23

I have a 2nd grader at xxx.

I have read the proposals and I urge you to unanimously support the Parcel Tax that is being voted on tonight and next week.

I don't have the financial options of many of the parents at our school. So I'd rather fight for keeping all of our small schools open and my daughter's opportunity for learning equal to everyone else on the Island.

I trust you will make the right choice for all of Alameda and I promise to work hard to get the word out and help make our dreams of consistently funded schools here a reality.

Parent 11/23

I very much commend the District for proposing a parcel tax structured in such a way as to solve some of the problems we encountered trying to pass Measure E.  The proposed parcel tax structure eliminates the distinction between commercial, multi-unit, and residential properties.  The structure also asks for a total revenue amount less then was asked for in Measure E.  I think both of these changes are  big steps towards getting more yes votes.  I also believe a building square footage tax comes closet to simulating an ad valorem tax.

However, I'm not convinced it will get us the 1.2% of 'no' voters needed from Measure E to vote yes.   The proposed commercial parcel tax revenue allocation is still 16% of the total tax revenue.  This is the same as in Measure E.    Regardless of what ABA or other business group may say, it will still be the small business owners and small multi-unit landlords, that live in  Alameda, who will be voting in this election.  And the amount of taxes these individuals will be paying will be about the same as it was under Measure E,  where many of these voters voted 'no.'

The debate tonight should be about the structure of a parcel tax that will generate the most 'yes' votes at the next parcel tax election and still deliver the total amount of revenue the District is asking for.   During the 3/15/2010 BOE meeting where the board discussed the structure of the Measure E tax, I stated that a parcel tax is inherently regressive, and any attempt to make it less regressive is just putting "lipstick on a pig."  Placing the next parcel tax on the ballot is less about what will make a "fair" parcel tax than  about which parcel tax will generate the most 'yes' votes.

To that end, I believe it is important that the BOE consider an alternate parcel tax structure that, unfortunately, was taken off the table very early.  A parcel tax structure that is truly flat, where all parcels in Alameda would be tax at $669/parcel would generate $11.55M for AUSD, and would garner the most yes votes in the next election.     The $669/parcel represents the residential tax amount we asked for on Measure E.   This structure would be the simplest flat tax that can be implemented and allocate the revenues raised between residential and commercial parcels at 95%/5%.  (These numbers, and all the percentage distribution numbers below, were derived from the parcel tax presentation given on 3/15/2010 for Measure E.  See attached document).

Here's the rationale for why this would generate the most yes votes for our next parcel tax:

1. 66.52% of the voters already said yes to $669 per residential parcel in the Measure E election.  You only need another 1.2% of the 'no' voters to say yes to get our next parcel tax to pass.
2. The same 66.52% of the voters will most likely vote 'yes' again to a $669.00 flat tax per parcel.
3. The majority of the split role parcels - commercial and multi-units - were going to pay more than the $669 under the Measure E proposal.  This represented 16% of total taxable parcels.  You will generate more yes votes by lowering these parcel taxes than keeping the same dollar allocation of 86%/16% as being proposed by AUSD.  I would venture to guess you will generate substantially more than 1.2% new 'yes' votes needed to win the next election.
4. You still eliminate the split role tax.  And you completely eliminate 'edge' conditions where the square footage of the building  doesn't equate to the 'value' of the building.  This one item will be the issue that generates the most 'no's in AUSD's proposed tax structure.
5. (note, if you raise the amount to $695/parcel, you will raise the $12M asked for under the AUSD proposed tax structure.  I left this off for two reasons:  1)  we know $669 will get you 65.5% of the vote and 2) Optically, reducing the total amount raised by another $450K will tell all the voters that the District is willing to do whatever is necessary to save our school from plan 'B'.  I believe $695 could win a parcel tax election, but do we need to take that chance?)

I would very much like the board to have a rational discussion around the above points and not to throw it out because the 'train has left the station'.  Alameda can't afford another parcel tax defeat.

Rest assured, I and the other 65.2% of the Measure E 'yes' voters will support any parcel tax the BOE places on the ballot.  My concern is how to move the most 'no' voters to 'yes' voters at the next election.

Parent 11/23

I am an Alameda resident and parent with two children who attend Franklin Elementary.  I have reviewed the summary of the parcel tax proposal prepared by Superintendent Vital and wanted to take a moment to urge you to vote unanimously in support of the tax on November 30.  I believe the tax is an excellent effort to address concerns raised by a small percentage of the business community.  Passage of the tax is essential to providing all of Alameda's children the highest quality education possible that will maximize their future opportunities and the future well-being of our community.

Community Member 11/23

We think it is urgent that the BOE UNANIMOUSLY support a new parcel tax measure to fund our schools....your show of unified support for the new measure is vital to Alameda and to the passage of the measure.
 
Different ideas of funding seem to surfacing at the last minute....a sales tax is not a steady stream of income and will effect the lower income residents who are already sufffering in this economy.
 
You, business owners, property owners and residents of Alameda have had more than ample time for input....tonight is the time for a united front and to move forward in support of a parcel tax measure.

Parent 11/23

I am a parent of a 2012-2013 kindergartner, and have been watching AUSD's funding issues and proposed solutions with growing concern. We moved here in part so we could send our child to Alameda's excellent schools, but it appears not at all certain that this excellence will be maintained.  First and foremost, I urge you all to vote for putting a parcel tax on the March 2011 ballot - the Board needs to send a unified message to the community regarding AUSD's need for funds to replace what the State of California has cut, and will continue to cut.

That said, I have some concerns about the plan currently before you. I'm concerned that the current proposal still neglects to address some issues that were key to the failure of measure E, namely school closure and consolidation. Though it is very apparent that the parents of students at particular schools, such as Franklin and Washington, feel their schools are valuable and should be maintained despite small facility size and under enrollment, it is apparent to me that these schools are not equally valued by the larger community. Though I recognize that consolidating these two schools, for instance, wouldn't save a great deal of money, doing so would represent to the larger community (many of whom do not have children in any of AUSD's schools) AUSD's willingness to make hard choices in hard times, while asking for money to maintain smaller class sizes, retain teachers, and save enrichment programs for AUSD as a whole.

Second, I would encourage you to eliminate adult education, and allocate that portion of the proposed tax toward other programs in jeopardy. As many have said, adults have many other local education and enrichment opportunities, but this is the only public choice for our school age children.

Parent 11/23

I am writing to clarify our position in our letters sent to each of you dated November 21, 2010. 
 
As Otis parents, my husband and I are open to the idea that Otis School may need to close under the current Plan Scenario B if the parcel tax does not pass.  But, we would only be supportive of that proposal if that meant that small class sizes (and other crucial educational programs) can be preserved as much as possible for all grade levels, with the highest priority given to maintaining small (25:1) class sizes for grades K-3.
 
We will do all that we can so that we do not have to face that reality by helping to pass a new parcel tax, if you will allow us.

Parent 11/23

I am writing to you today as the product of xxx, xxx and xxx. I am writing to you as the mother of a 6th grader and 1st grader. I am also writing to you as an educator who is always looking for ways to best meet the social, emotional and academic needs of students.
 
I have spent over 20 years focused on education in the west end of Alameda. I will be the first to point out the inequities that are alive and well despite our attempts to address, suppress, etc the truths of priviledge.  The fact that Woodstock, Longfellow and Miller were consolidated despite their communities cries will never be forgotten in our home.
 
That said, I do not believe that a 7-12 at Encinal is the punishing of the west end nor does it have to be thought of as a deficit model. Reform is difficult and change is frightening. I have always thought of myself as someone who loves middle school although when this idea for a 7-12 first emerged, what I realized is that I love middle school aged children. My list of what makes that job difficult rarely includes things that have anything to do with individual children. What makes middle school the most challenging, in my opinion, is culture or lack of the culture that promotes inclusivity, academics, consistency, follow-through and parental involvement.
 
In every school year, 1/3 of your culture is brand new, 1/3 is on the way out and 1/3 is in the 7th grade (by far the most challenging of years!). Parents who are very involved in elementary school bow out. We often see them appear again in high school as their children become involved in sports, music, drama, etc. Three years in one school are just enough time to insure that the culture will be transient.
 
I would ask you to think about the possibilit yof a 7-12. I would like to explore this option, regardless of the parcel tax success or failure. This could be a unique opportunity to increas the enrollment at Encinal, offer the west end some options that might actually make the east end realize what we have "down here" and to build something that provides the opportunity for students to spend 6 years in one school and to be embraced by a long term culture that supports them socially, emotionally and academically.
 
Our family is thrilled by this prospect and would welcome the opportunity to work on exploring this as an option.

Parent 11/23

Thank you for continuing to be responsive to the thoughts and feelings of the community. After attending the last School Board meeting (including the Saturday continuation), I am more aware than ever of the tremendous amount of work that has gone into planning for the coming few years. Special thanks to Mr. McPhetridge and the rest of the Superintendent's staff for all the data-crunching and creative thinking that has gone into the design of "Plan B".  Although it is truly hard to contemplate accepting such changes, it does make it more palatable knowing how much care has been taken.

I still can't help feeling that all of the most drastic changes will be borne by the Central and West End areas. Much of this is obviously driven by demographics, and a need to re-organize Wood Middle School irrespective of the outcome of a parcel tax. Perhaps this will be a good thing in the long run - whether Wood students become part of a 7-12 school on the Encinal campus, or whether the Central and West End schools all become K-8. I won't speak to this except to say that after having our daughter spend a year at Wood, my husband and I decided to put both of our kids in private middle schools.  We were all looking forward to having them return to attend Alameda High, and in fact our daughter is very happy there in her freshman year.

The fact that Plan B would redirect us to Encinal High when we live 1 block away from Alameda High has us re-thinking our plans again. AHS Principal Kelly Lara has assured the PTSA that there will be sibling preference admission, which is very encouraging if true. I am sure that there are other families like ours that would like to stay in the Alameda public schools if at all possible, and the Board could go some way towards getting parental buy-in if a sibling preference policy is specifically spelled out in the language of Plan B.

Even better would be to give all families who live within the current AHS attendance  boundary a guaranteed option of attending AHS rather than Encinal, even if they do not have a sibling currently enrolled.  Families might have various reasons for choosing this option -  because they live very close to AHS, or they already have allegiance to AHS, or there are particular programs offered primarily at AHS, or even that their kids want to attend with their friends.  Even in the unlikely event that 100% of eligible families chose to attend AHS, the school would have the capacity to admit them, since it is already doing so. Over time, the number of families choosing this option would likely drop, particularly if their kids attend middle school on the Encinal campus. Presumably they would feel more allegiance to the Jets, and value the continuity of remaining at Encinal.

If necessary, such an option could have a specified sunset date, although I would favor it being a standing policy. For one thing, it would eliminate the prospect of having the Hornet field lie within the Jet attendance zone. More seriously, it seems only fair that families who have chosen to live close to AHS should have some priority in attending, and should not be displaced by the large number of families attending from Bay Farm. Aligning the high school and middle school boundaries is convenient but not essential, and providing an attendance option seems like a reasonable solution.

Finally, I urge you all to vote FOR the placement of a parcel tax on the next ballot. With the support of most of the business community, and the willingness of all of us to continue and increase our efforts to persuade others, it should stand a better chance of passage than Measure E.

Parent 11/23

Last night I had a chance to review your proposed Plan B if the Parcel Tax does not pass.  For a district that believes in “Equity for All”,  “Closing the Achievement Gap”, and encouraging “College Going Cultures” on its school campuses, it is hard to believe that these new educational catch phrases are nothing more than that when reviewing Plan B. 

I encourage every parent and school board member to read Whistling Vivaldi and Other Clues to How Stereotypes Affect Us, by Claude Steele, the current provost of Columbia University and elected member of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Education.   Published in 2010, this book,  “…. sparks groundbreaking research on stereotype threat, leadership of influential institutions, and-most important-interventions that make a genuine difference in our society.”

I make this plea, because however unintentional, by endorsing Plan B, blatant, detrimental messages are being sent.  Here are a few examples:

• That the children and families of the West End don’t have voices or care as much because not enough of them show up at meetings. 
• That investing in a child that is performing at Basic and Above on the Star Test is easier and will show more growth, and that making larger school of which the majority of children will be less than proficient in mathematics, and giving them special  “intervention” classes with low standards is the answer. 

This “educational reform” denies these important, creative, and bright children the very access and exposure to skills needed for them to even have a chance of going to college. Whether intentional or not, this is grossly unjust and we must be vigilant that our best of intentions are not harming our children.  We must educate ouselves on how best to educate our children.

As the mother of a 5th grade son who attends xxx School, I cannot endorse this plan, and I hope every parent, regardless of attendance area, speaks up about this.

Parent 11/23

I ask you to support the new parcel tax to support Alameda’s schools.  There are two reasons people move to Alameda:   the high-quality schools, and the safe residential environment.  If the schools are no longer good, few will want to move here, and some will want to move out.  Housing prices will drop, and neighborhoods will decline.  The tax base will diminish.  It will be a dangerous economic spiral downward, if the schools disintegrate.

Parent 11/23

As the father of a new Kindergartener and a 3-year old who wishes fervently that she were in Kindergarten *right now*, I urge you to move forward the Resolution to call an election on March 8 for voter approval of a new parcel tax to support Alameda schools.
 
As a nonprofit professional who works with dropouts from a neighboring city's school system, I can tell you that nothing impacts individuals, families, and cities more than school quality. Alameda's schools are drivers of property values and public safety.Give Alamedans another opportunity to save our schools.

Parent 11/23

First of all, my husband and I are very grateful for the huge amoutn of time and energy and stress you have committed to our school district.
 
As a teacher,parent of ahs studnet and special needs student,and homeowner, I am very aware of the emotional issues that surround the decisions around this Master Plan. And yes -there have been west-east end issues for a very long time. Unfortunately, I wish we could  all agree but we can't.
 
If at all possible to support k-8 school at Wood rather than re districiting the boundary for an encinal 7-12-PLEASE do so.
I would rather have 32 kids in my class and I sure wish other teachers woudl tell you this too so that some of the deep seeded equity issues can be addressed.
 
I also know that this is an unbearable financial time- so I will support whatever master plan scenario that is before us.

Parent 11/23

I am the parent of a second and fourth grader in this district.  I want to thank each of you for the incredible commitment you have made this summer and fall to engage our community in very difficult discussions about the future of our schools. You have reached out and listened to stakeholders through Board of Education meetings, public forums, surveys, PTA meetings, business association meetings, and other venues.

It would be wonderful to craft a school parcel tax that would be supported by everyone. However, 100 percent agreement on anything, much less a tax, is a fairytale. Having engaged our community in months of dialogue, it is now time for you, our education leaders, to lead.  I ask that you vote unanimously to put the parcel tax being recommended by the District on a  March Ballot.  This is not a perfect tax in my eyes. I would gone for a different total amount. I would have allocated the funds somewhat differently. But I recognize this proposed parcel tax reflects compromise.  I am ready to work with each of you to pass this compromise.  The alternative is simply horrible for our students. 

There were many days during the Measure E campaign, and also during the Measure H campaign, when I would have to steel myself before canvasing.  Campaigning isn't something I enjoy.  I'd get myself out there by recognizing that students in our town need adults to stand up and advocate for them.  I'd often think not of my kids, who at the end of the day I know will get a fine education because my family has social and financial resources to ensure that happens. We know that may mean leaving Alameda, the town we love, for a community that is supporting its schools through this fiscal crisis. My family has it's own Plan B. I know of many other families who are also dedicating themselves, one more time, to do whatever they can to help this next parcel tax pass.  But if it doesn't, they're leaving the district and the Island. The students who will suffer the most without this proposed tax will be the students whose families do not have resources to get them out.

Please approve this proposed tax, which is the results of months of consultation and compromise, and then work tirelessly with me to pass it.

Parent 11/23

I urge the board to support a parcel tax.

Parent 11/22

We are parents of a student attending xxx High School. Our daughter, Mi-Anne was in Alameda High's fall production of "You Can't Take it With You" and we think the kids did marvelously. The set, costuming, tech work, and acting were all very professional. It is nice to see teenagers enrich themselves in the arts. Drama is very important to these kids and we urge you to keep it alive at Alameda High. Drama has been an amazing confidence booster for our daughter. She often tells us that ending the day with her drama class always lifts her spirits because the class is such a tightly knit family. Mi-Anne is taking 4 AP classes and 1 HP class at Alameda High and Drama is a very important stress reliever in her life. The drama class helps to solidifying close bonds with people of the same interests as she. It is a creative outlet for many students. My daughter has made many close friends in drama because they all share a common interest in theater. She has also told me that drama has helped her very much with public seaking and thus in classes where debate is needed such as AP US History and AP Euro.

Drama is a very important class at Alameda High,

Parent 11/22

This Santa Monica sales tax is very interesting, particularly as it required only a simple majority to pass. The schools need funding, and the people of Alameda are willing to pass a tax.

My email to the School Board is copied below. I am a supporter of the parcel tax, but when I read the recommendation of a $.32/sf tax based on building square footage, I was really surprised. This is not a fair tax. Building square footage is not a piece of data that is accurately tracked by the County Assessor. California taxes are based on purchase price, so square footage is not tracked in detail. The level of accuracy is different for each property.

Also, it is a large tax for residential owners. For many people this will be over $1000, and for owners of small multi-unit buildings, it will be $1500-3000 or more. This is more than most people are expecting.

Berkeley has a tax based on building square footage. Even so, it is not equitable. We simply do not have accurate figures for building square footage. As an aside - Berkeley does not charge the same rate for residential and non-residential parcels. They have the same mechanism for both, but different rates.

And does the $9000 cap mean that Alameda Towne Center shopping center pays only $9000? Lot size = 1,740,532 sf. Perhaps there should be no cap when the property has gross receipts over a certain figure. Since business license fees are based on gross receipts, this info is available locally.

We need a tax that is equitable and that can pass. This sales tax sounds very interesting. There are many other possibilities. For the parcel tax, however, it should be a flat tax per parcel or based on lot size - because this would be based on data that is accurate for all parcels. Building square footage numbers are not.

Parent 11/22

I'd like to thank each of you for your ongoing considerations and discussions about parcel tax vs no parcel tax.  It has been a long and rocky road and your efforts are much appreciated.  Tomorrow's meeting is an important one -- the one that decides if the parcel tax is going to be put on the Spring ballet.  I am in hopes that each of you vote to put the measure onto the ballet.   It's vital to our schools and our community. 

Thank you in advance for your support of the new parcel tax measure.

Parent 11/22

I have nothing to say that you have not heard from many an Alameda parent: we must have a parcel tax on the March ballot. We must not allow the decimation of our schools and educational programs. I wholeheartedly believe the current dialogue among AUSD, business owners and the general public will make the difference at the polls and will lead to passage.

I, along with many of my peers, have committed to doing our part to pass the parcel tax--knocking on doors and engaging with neighbors all over the island, to clarify the details of the tax and the importance of their "yes" vote.

Please give us the opportunity to work towards that goal. We need all of you behind us.

Parent 11/22

We are writing to thank you for your tireless work in listening, evaluating, analyzing and negotiating (both with each other and with our community) to come up with a proposed parcel tax to help our schools make it through the current budget crisis.  Without this parcel tax, our schools, our children and our community are going to suffer.  While we could all find reasons to quibble with bits and pieces of the current proposal - fundamentally, it is fair, it will get us through this difficult time and we believe it will pass.  We are going to be out of town for a week starting tomorrow, so we cannot be at the board meeting tomorrow night to express our support for the current proposal.  However, with this e-mail we would like to let you know we are in favor of the current proposal and we look forward to a unanimous vote from our school board in support of the parcel tax as proposed on November 19th.

Parent 11/22

I have a harvest dinner for my son's preschool tomorrow night and will likely miss the School Board meeting.  I was in complete tears at the last School Board meeting (especially after watching so many young students get up and express themselves).  I just want to say that we as a community need this parcel tax and we need our schools.  We are already experiencing the impact of some of the budget cuts.  We need to do all that we can to keep our schools open and funded.  Please please please vote unanimously to place the tax on the March ballot.  We need to show the community that the School Board unanimously supports the parcel tax.  As a parent, I will do all that I can to help the effort to pass the parcel tax.

Parent 11/22

Parent 11/22

I have been waiting for the staff to provide a list of cuts that will happen next year, even with the passage of the parcel tax. Most of us knew the numbers would not add up, even with a parcel tax, and more cuts would be necessary. I cannot begin to express my shock when I read that even if the parcel tax passes, there will be a huge cut to the special education budget. The surveys and all previous information from the district have never included any mention of special education funding. To finally place it on the chopping block, just 2 days before the final chance for public input before the board is more than frustrating. The current parcel tax language includes funding for adult education, small schools and charter schools. Without a change to the currently proposed parcel tax language, special education will suffer a huge cut while these other programs will be funded. I cannot believe the community and/or the school board truly believes that adult school enrichment classes, small ( and one could argue, fiscally irresponsible) schools and Charter schools have a higher priority over special education funding.

My son was recently (just last week) diagnosed with severe dyslexia. He is an incredibly intelligent young boy, scoring very high on intelligence tests, however he cannot process the written word like the rest of us. It has been an incredibly difficult struggle trying to get the district to provide the proper testing and support for our son over these past 2 years. We have been told certain services were not available due to lack of funding. We have spent a lot of money for help for our son, and I have put in countless hours of research, learning what our/his rights are as far as what the district is legally obligated to provide. I've always thought how hard it must be for the child whose parents work full-time or who don't speak english or who don't know to challenge the district when they threaten their right to a Free and Appropriate Public Education. It is such a battle. I cannot even begin to imagine how much more difficult this process will be with further cuts to this department. And, ultimately, it will hurt all students. If the in-class aides are cut even more, the teachers will be left trying to support the kids who need extra help while trying to continue to teach and manage the entire classroom. If you cut the teachers on special assignment, the ones who conduct the necessary assessments and who provide training and support for teachers, you will lose money. Without access to these assessments within the district, parents will have no choice but to request IEE's at the district's expense. Everyone will lose. No wait... not the students enrolled in the adult school or in the charter schools.

Please include funding for Special Education in the parcel tax.

Community Member 11/22

I just picked this up from one of my Realtor online updates.  We could so something like this in Alameda and it would take two measures.  One to levy the sales tax and the other to allocate a goodly percentage of the revenue to the schools.

I'm not giving up on spreading the load so everybody gets to pay for schools, just not property owners, and that's because everybody benefits - whether they have kids, had kids, or never have kids.

I'm still a fan of assessing some amt to each monthly electric bill that goes out and that covers a lot more folks than property owners.  And as you reminded me at a recent HBR office meeting during the election season, I've been pumping for that since I wrote you in 2007 (you indicated that was on your website). It made me smile.

I'm just tired of people saying we don't have the time to figure it out; the Alameda Muni Power governing board saying they can't do it. It's got to be at the directive of the city council.  Well, since Mayor elect Marie Gilmore  says she's all about the schools now (even though the CC doesn't have any jurisdiction) then let's get something going.

I like this sales tax idea because we are picking up more business in town and that includes out of area shoppers.  Ah, spreading the load.  

I'm aware that Adrienne Lakadat sent you and the other Board members an email regarding the inequities of the parcel tax.  She included that email in one she sent to me asking what I thought about the whole thing.  In turn, I've cc'd her on this along with council members, and AUSD board members.

I am very concerned about the inequities of the parcel tax, as you know from our previous discussions.  I'm also concerned that a 7 year sunset period is a really long time.  But as is human nature, we tend to get something and then forget about it until time runs out.  And as is typical, I expect that the revenue generated will be hailed as not enough because this is about what will be tolerable (i.e. pass), not what it takes.

Unfortunately, I see no end to cities having to fix their own school funding.  The state clearly knows nothing about anything it does.  Relying on it is a joke, even if they could fix all the financial messes in one fell swoop immediately, the state elected officials are not capable of doing the right things for the greater good consistently.

As I said at that HBR meeting, this is the time for Alameda to break through the 'barriers' and start moving forward on more than temporary solutions.

SANTA MONICA PASSES UNIQUE REVENUE MEASURE
On Election Day, the City of Santa Monica and the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District were successful in passing a unique tax that will benefit both the city and the school district. Measure Y, a half-cent sales tax passed at 61% (a simple majority was needed), which will generate an estimated $12 million per year. A companion measure, Measure YY also passed. This advisory measure recommends that half of the proceeds from the sales tax go to the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District (SMMUSD). Measure YY passed with 68% of the vote, again only needing a simple majority.  Both entities needed additional funds to replace money taken away by the State. Earlier in the year the SMMUSD failed to pass a parcel tax that required a 2/3 majority. 

More info:
http://www.publicceo.com/index.php/local-governments/151-local-governments-publicceo-exclusive/2337-santa-monica-passes-unique-revenue-measure

Parent 11/22

Please give serious attention to the Special Education needs of our student community when drafting the details for the upcoming parcel tax.  I feel very strongly that this element of our curriculum is critically important, and in determining what elements require priority funding, I think that you should put Special Education above Adult Education, without question.  Please do not neglect our most needy of students in earmarking funds from the parcel tax.

Parent 11/22

I am the parent of 2 children currently enrolled in Alameda Schools.  I am already feeling the impact of the budget deficit.  Larger class sizes and the furlough days have been increasingly tough on my entire family (and we are lucky to have support to help out on these days as I know many do not).  I would urge you to please come together and unanimously pass the outline of the parcel tax on get it on the ballot! 

Parent 11/22

I have always been a supporter of the parcel tax, and this has not changed.  My child is at the beginning of her educational journey, and among many other concerns I have for her, I am deeply concerned about the effect of 32:1 student teacher ratio will have on the quality of instruction in her classrooms, as well as her educational experience as a whole.  I am a staunch supporter of public education and of neighborhood schools, and I am truly appalled and disheartened that the Board would even consider such an inequitable option.  As much as I was not in favor of the first plan to consolidate of the middle and high schools, at least I felt like all Alamedans were in the same boat, making the best of a bad situation.  The new version of the Master Plan would truly create a climate of haves and have nots, further dividing what I felt until recently was a tightly-knit cohesive community and a town and educational system I was proud to live within.

I think the question the Board should ask is would this plan reduce support for the parcel tax for those whose children are least affected by this plan?  I am speaking of those living on the east end or on Bay Farm, whose young children may initially suffer larger class sizes, but would otherwise be minimally affected from the 3rd grade on.  What incentive is there for parents on the east end and Bay Farm to reach deep into their pockets in hard economic times to pay for a parcel tax when their older children are so relatively unaffected by this plan?  Meanwhile, central and west Alamedans are faced with realization they may be forced to send their young and impressionable 12 year-old children straight from elementary school to a large high school campus on the far end of the island to mingle with teenagers and young adults.  I am deeply concerned about this possibility, but I doubt the east end or Bay Farm residents share my concern when this plan so clearly benefits "them" over "us".  It is unconscionable to me that such an inequitable plan would even be considered by the Board.

I am a homeowner in central Alameda.  The educational system in Alameda weighed heavily in my decision to purchase a home here.  It makes perfect sense to me that my daughter should attend our local high school (AHS is located in *central* Alameda) after she has graduated from middle school and has made the transition from elementary school with her peers.  As a mother and a Marriage and Family Therapist, I would like to see my daughter enter high school when she is 14 years old and physically, psychologically socially, and emotionally better able to cope with the pressures of high school.  Nothing else makes sense, especially not the new version of the Master Plan.

I sincerely hope the Board will come to the realization that this plan is clearly at the detriment of central and west Alameda children and to the benefit of the rest of the island.  If cuts need to be made, they should hurt us all equally.

Parent 11/22

I have attended all public meetings that discussed the formulation of the new parcel tax.

I have also become well informed as to the various proposals from the Alameda Business Association(ABA).
 
In order for a new parcel tax to be successful at the ballot, I have some specific recommendations for you:
 
- Setting a high rate per sq.ft. will further exasperate the current economic hardship on residential homes, small residential income property owners, and small business owners.
 
-a lower rate per sq.ft. that at least provides a little more funding than A&H will have a better chance of passing
 
-it is too risky to aim for an unreasonable amount of revenue by using a high tax rate...this has less of a chance for passage AND if it fails AUSD has a  ZERO increase in parcel tax revenues!
 
-Again a lower rate per sq.ft. producing more than A&H is better than ZERO funding from an unreasonably high parcel tax that fails!
 
-an affordable building rate would be 20 to 23 cents per sq.ft.
-an affordable land rate would be 11 to 12 cents per sq. ft.
 
 
I will end with this observation...
We are all dealing with a severe economic downturn and if AUSD wants a new parcel tax to pass, all consideration at this new attempt needs to keep this reality in the forefront!

Parent 11/22

I know that they have a square footage number and that it can be found. Thank you for the link. My point is that it is not a priority for the Assessor to keep this number accurate. They generally do not use it for taxation, which is the reason that it is not displayed on the county site. For most people it is lower than the actual square footage that they have. For many it is not low due to more recent improvements or more recent construction. It is generally accurate on condos because they have a recorded survey map. It is not accurate on older houses, especially those that have older additions. Second buildings on a lot are sometimes included but often not. This makes it a problematic data point for a tax that is supposed to be fair.

Honestly, every real estate company warns every buyer that county square footage numbers are not accurate and may not be relied upon. How can you base this very large tax on that kind of data?

Parent 11/22

Also, I looked up Berkeley and see what you mean. They are using "building square footage and property use codes." Residential and non-residential have different rates.

I still do not believe this is an appropriate thing to base our tax on. Most people don't even know what the tax collector has down as their building square footage. It is not on the county assessor web site. It is not accurate.

This is a tax that we need, but I think it will lose votes when many people realize that it will be over $1000 for their houses and multi-unit buildings.

Parent 11/22

The Alameda County Assessor says Towne Centre has over 1,740,532 square feet of "improved property" but the AUSD says that it only has 706,000 square feet of buildings.  Therefore, under the new AUSD definition and with an $8,500 cap per parcel that means Towne Centre will pay 1.2 cents per square foot and the rest of us will pay 32 cents.

These new AUSD definitions mean that instead of paying about 1/2 of one penny Towne Centre will pay 2.5 times that amount! So, instead of paying paying 1.6% of the rate you and I will be paying they will be paying 3.75% the rate you and I will be paying.

A question for Civics Class:
If poorer people and businesses are taxed at a higher rate than richer businesses is that called a progressive tax or a regressive tax?

Parent 11/22

I feel that during this time of budgetary crisis, Alameda residents need to pull together and preserve the wonderful high-quality education for our children that previous generations also enjoyed. Alameda is an amazing place to live, for people of all ages, and our great schools are part of the equation. Hopefully down the road, the State of California will be able to remedy this situation as it should, but for now, we need to step up and help ourselves in preserving the great asset that we have.

Parent 11/22

I am writing to voice my support for a replacement parcel tax.  I am xxx Elementary PTA's President and share our community's concerns over "Plan B."  The only changes I would like to see to the purposed parcel tax are to: 1. increase the business cap to $9500, and 2. extend the tax from 7 to 10 years. 
 
Unfortunately, I teach on Tuesday night and will not be able to attend the meeting to publically support and encourage you to support a new parcel tax.  However, please know that every Paden parent I've discussed this issue with is in support of a school parcel tax.  Please also know that anything short of a 5-0 vote in support of the parcel tax is unacceptable in this voter's eyes. 

Parent 11/22

I’m an Alameda resident and AUSD parent. I’m writing you today to urge you to unanimously support the district’s new parcel tax proposal and to vote in support of the tax on November 30.

Without this new tax on the ballot in March, our district cannot continue to offer our kids what it promises: Excellence and equity for all students.

Parent 11/22

I understand that this Tuesday, the Board will hear Superintendent Vital's proposal for the parcel tax to fund critical needs in Alameda schools.  On your final vote on the proposal Nov. 30, I would like to respectfully urge you to support that the measure goes on the ballot as soon as possible.  This is critical to the future of Alameda and is a priority for this community! I have two children in Alameda public schools and I also work as a contracted school counselor at Ruby Bridges School.  I know what Alameda schools were like in the past, and I know what the proposed cuts in the budget could do for their future.  That concerns me greatly.  Both my husband and I agree that a parcel tax has the support in our home and in this community to pass in a general election.  Please put in on the ballot!

Parent 11/21

I notice that you propose to continue to fund some Adult Education enrichment programs and reduce funding for Special Education, AP classes, enrichment classes and sports.  I'm sorry, but adults have had their turn for education.  It is time for young people to be given their chance for a bright future.  Perhaps, you should review "The Alameda Unified School District Guiding Principles".  Fund the future, not the past.

Parent 11/21

First, we would like to thank Superintendent Vital, her staff and you for your hard work and commitment to our public schools.  This process and public conversation you have guided us through over the past three months has been complex and you have handled it with grace, professionalism and resolve.  We appreciate the extensive public outreach you have conducted and the great lengths you have gone to incorporate community feedback.

My husband and I purchased our home in Alameda 7 ½ years ago, a few weeks before our son was born.  We were attracted by many of the town’s qualities, the most important being that Alameda struck us as a very family-oriented town and one that valued high quality public schools.  In the intervening years, Alameda has proven to be all of those things, in spades.  Our son is now a thriving second grader at Otis School. 

Given current budget projections, economizing school facilities seems inevitable.  And while my family would be heartbroken that that may mean a radical change to our Otis community, my husband and I believe the first priority should be maintaining the quality of the educational programming as much as possible during this most difficult time.  To be specific, we believe:

• Smaller class sizes (or higher teacher : student ratios) for all grades is critical
• Special education and opportunities for advanced learners must continue
• That a well rounded education means maintaining a rigorous English, math, science, social science AND art and music program
• And we must continue to attract and retain excellent teachers and provide the needed support to all teachers who strive to improve

We are keenly aware that our strong position on behalf of the highest quality programming possible means that costs must be made elsewhere such as consolidating schools.  While we would be deeply saddened if Otis were to close, we would be willing to accept that if it meant that quality programming could be maintained for students across the island and that our excellent teachers could be retained.

We strongly urge the Board to adopt a resolution that will provide for a new parcel tax no later than November 30th to provide enough time to salvage the 2011/12 school year.  The parcel tax should be sizable enough and of a sufficient term to financially stabilize the District’s finances.  Please, do not defer!  While continued debate may seem warranted, to delay will only exacerbate our enormous fiscal gap resulting in a far worse fate for our schools.

We volunteered many hours on the Measure E campaign and are ready to do it again for this one last opportunity to save our schools.

Parent 11/21

I read the latest parcel tax proposal and hope you all will vote yes ASAP so we can get to work.

Parent 11/21

Please vote to put the Superintendent's recommendation for a parcel tax on the ballot.

Parent 11/21

My son has attended Alameda Public Schools since kindergarten. He is currently a ninth grader at Nea Community Learning Center. Please generously support our public charter schools. Mainstream public schools do not suit every child and I am pleased that we have options in Alameda. I have always been a strong supporter of public education. I am a property owner in Alameda and I have voted for every parcel tax that has supported our public schools. I sincerely hope that the next parcel tax bases it's assessment of residential property on square footage so that it is more equitable for all property owners.

Parent 11/21

Parent 11/21

I am sitting in a meeting room at the Grand Hyatt in San Francisco, waiting for my son xxx, a senior at xxx High School, to finish his audition for admission to the American Musical and Dramatic Academy in New York City.  He has gotten to this point in his career in large part through his classes in Musical Theater and Drama at xxx High School.  Despite having known for years that he wanted to pursue a career in musical theater on Broadway, Alec chose AHS over the Oakland School for the Arts in order to have a more well-rounded education.  xxx has taken full advantage of the opportunities at xxx.  In addition to playing leading roles in school plays and musicals, and having been voted Best Performer by the xxx 2011 senior class, he is a straight-A student and an AP Scholar with Honor. 

The performing arts program in Alameda schools provides vocational education for future theater professionals – actors, set builders, sound and lighting technicians, and stage managers.  It also builds confidence, poise, and creativity in future lawyers, teachers, businesspeople, scientists, politicians, and other professionals and tradespeople.  The skills of teamwork and cooperation that are developed in young actors are carried into other classrooms and out into the real world.  In a society in which too many people achieve success by making others look bad, students in theater classes have a healthier, more cooperative attitude. The success of a play or musical requires each actor and behind-the-scenes crew member to make his fellow cast members look good, and the students work hard to accomplish that.

I urge you to retain Drama, Musical Theater, and related classes in Alameda’s schools.

Parent 11/21

Wow - I have been a fervent supporter of the parcel tax for Alameda schools, and have voted "yes" to every previous tax, but I cannot vote for this one as it is currently stated.  Please change this!

Building square footage is not a piece of information that is reliably reported by any agency in Alameda county. Because taxes are based on purchase price, and parcel ownership is based on lot size, these are the only two pieces of information that are tracked in detail by the Assessor's office of Alameda county or any county in California. As a real estate agent, I routinely advise clients that building square footage in tax records is not a number to be relied on in any sense. In fact, all local real estate agencies that I know of require their agents to advise their clients of this fact. There are standard disclosures signed for every transaction stating that prospective purchasers understand that square footage is unknown and is only hinted at by the records kept by the county. Sometimes basements are counted. Sometimes not. Sometimes additions are counted. Sometimes not. Cottages, Attics. New kitchens. Laundry rooms, rec rooms, every conceivable space. Houses with radically different square footages may show the same in the county records, with one having every foot documented and another not. This is generally not a problem, because it is not a statistic that is used in any way for taxation.

Trying to use a piece of information that is not reliably tracked as the sole basis for a new and very large tax is unfair - really unfair.

As stated with $.32 per sf, a 3000 sf house will pay approximately $1000/year in extra tax. This house may have a basement with 1200sf, a cottage with 900sf and an old laundry addition that was modified into a kitchen extension at 350sf. If these are counted by the tax collector, they would add $390, $288, and $112 respectively or almost $790 in total - a 79% difference in the tax. Any of these things may or may not be included in assessor records. The same house could have any one of these things counted or not counted.

This is a large tax - adding $1000 or more to many residential property tax bills is not an easy tax in these times. Doing so based on such poorly recorded data is extremely unfair - to the point of being indefensible.

Please take this information in the spirit in which it is intended. I support a parcel tax. I am willing to pay extra tax to support the public schools in Alameda. The tax must be fair, though, and needs to be based on numbers that are reliably recorded. Building square footage is not.

Parent 11/21

My husband and I are the proud parents of an Otis Kindergartener. Our younger child is 2, and we hope to send her to Alameda public schools as well. Like many families, we moved to Alameda in part because of the excellent reputation of its schools. And we have not been disappointed! The teachers, principles and community are amazing. We worked as "street captains" to get out the vote for Measure E, and we are committed to supporting the community's effort to raise funds needed to support our schools in the face of state budget cuts and the expiration of Measures A and H.
 
I believe it is critical for our schools and our community that the School Board vote to include a parcel tax measure on the March 2011 ballot. I appreciate everything the Board has done to solicit input on the structure of a parcel tax; now it is time to act based on that input. Please vote this month to approve a parcel tax for the March 2011 ballot and give it your enthusiastic support, without a delay in the process.

Parent 11/21

I am writing today as unfortunately, I will be unable to attend Tuesday night's Board Meeting.  I have watched with increasing interest and increasing understanding as you and the AUSD District Staff have tackled the financial crisis while attempting to satisfy the community concerns.  I truly appreciate all that you and the many staff members have done to help the community become more informed.
 
My concern at this point is about the ability of the public as well as the Board to make the best possible decisions with regards to the balance of program cuts, possible consolidations and parcel tax priorities.  I have reviewed (briefly) the documents for the Parcel Tax as well as the Master Plan Scenario without a Parcel Tax.  I am truly appreciative of the increased detail and the clarity of the with/without parcel tax comparisons.  However, based on my limited understanding of our financial situation, even if the Parcel Tax passes in March, the District will need to cut some programs or include some consolidations.  My guess is that number is in the range of $6M to $8M (I am basing that on the cuts that the District instituted this year). 
 
I understand that there will be a document available tonight with this information.  I am writing now (with the hope that this was an unnecessary email, in a way) because I believe it is imperative that the program cuts be discussed at the same time as the Parcel Tax language.  As a constituent, I want to be able to rank some programs above what is in the current parcel tax language and hope that there is the opportunity to do this.  I know that at the past Board meeting, there was some discussion or reference to not voting to approve IF the language changes between November 23 and the vote (November 30?).  Unfortunately, since the detailed information on actual amounts allocated via the Parcel Tax as well as actual programs that might or might not be cut EVEN if the Parcel Tax passes has not been available until now, I believe it is unrealistic for the Board or the community to have been able to truly prioritize.
 
I have taken the time to provide my feedback on Mike McMahon's survey and have encouraged others to do so, however, the information presented at the last meeting is slightly different than todays information (or at least my perception of it) and I believe others may have not understood fully what was being proposed.
 
I encourage the Board to carefully weigh the priorities as I have been attempting to do so.  My personal priorities would include:

Charter Schools should be our lowest priority for Parcel Tax funds.  I would save any and all programs as well as salaries before allocating my tax dollars to an institution that is independent of our District (at least in part) and that has many other fundraising opportunities not available to AUSD.  I would surmise that they are listed on the Parcel Tax to appease those voters but our priority as a District should be education of the students WITHIN AUSD.  The families at Charter Schools have chosen to leave AUSD and take their ADA with them. 

Adult Education is also a lower priority than our children.  The goal of AUSD should be to provide the best quality educational opportunities for students in K through 12.  I understand that some teenagers also utilized Adult Education for GED and other requirements but there are other methods for providing those services.  I also realize that the flexibility of using the money targeted for Adult Education may be a temporary solution but we should maintain the focus on K through 12.

Neighborhood Schools are important but there should be a rational approach to schools whose enrollment is not cost-effective.  I know that if my family was at Washington Elementary School, I would fight to keep it open but I also believe that continuing to fund a school that has a history of being unable to attract and retain students is a no-win solution.  It reminds me of Meg Whitman (and Schwarzenegger's) campaign ad - to continue to do things that are not working is foolish.

Parent 11/20

I am writing to express my deep concern regarding a possible decision to cut dramatic and music arts from our public schools.  The community of Alameda has a tradition of commitment to the arts for our children, as our public schools have managed ever-decreasing funding.  Enhanced by such organizations as Alameda Children’s Musical Theater, Kids Take the Stage, Alameda School of Music, and other organizations, arts programming in our schools provides important cultural experience that benefits our students’ development in important ways.  Both typical and nontraditional learners find success in the arts.  The arts offer a bridge to finding community and connection at school.  Research consistently shows that participation in the arts improves academic outcomes.  Communities that cannot afford to support the arts fail their children, as they diminish cultural experiences that link us all with the foundation of what it means to be creative, collaborative members of our city.