The
LookOut Letters
to the Editor |
|
All Hopes Rest with Parcel Tax, Kudos and Reasons to Back EE Dear Editor: The recent letter by Peter Tigler regarding the means available to
raise school funds contains a number of errors and misinterpretations
(LETTERS:
"Tax Options," Oct. 27, 2002). Contrary to Mr. Tigler's assertions, parcel taxes are the only means currently available to school districts for generating operating revenues -- i.e., the revenues that support instructional programs-from local sources. The other means for raising revenues mentioned by Mr. Tigler are either unavailable to school districts or available only for facilities construction. Specifically, Proposition 13 removed the ability of school districts
to ask voters to raise property taxes based on assessed value (ad valorem
taxes). School districts with new residential and commercial development
within their Mr. Tigler is correct that a handful of districts have written different
features into their parcel taxes, such as Berkeley's measure that taxes
the structures on each parcel based on square footage. Both the school
district's With regard to accountability, Measure EE includes much stronger oversight and accountability provisions than any previous school measure in our district. This will ensure that the district continues on its path of strengthening financial management practices. The fact is that Measure EE is the best that our school district can do to raise operating revenues from our communities. It is also the only hope for our schools to acquire the revenues they need to continue their recent remarkable gains and to provide an extraordinary public education for all students. Sincerely, Jose Escarce Michael Rich October 29, 2002 Dear Editor, Frank Gruber's piece on EE ("WHAT I SAY: Thank You Voters In Advance," Oct. 28, 2002) was as good as anything I've read lately on the Op-Ed pages of the New York Times or Washington Post (I don't get the L.A. Times as I just don't have that large a quantity of fish to wrap...). Keep up the good work and hope this modest positive response makes up for a few of the nasty negative ones that go with the territory. Regards, October 28, 2002 Dear Editor, Our family represents three generations of graduates from Santa Monica High School, beginning in 1945 all the way through to 2001. As in all families, we have our disagreements. However, when it comes to the passage of Measure EE, you will find us in total agreement. As a community, it is crucial that we sustain our public school system and our students. Measure EE deserves our support. We have been beneficiaries of our fine public school system. However, we have also witnessed the difficulties in maintaining that excellence with the ongoing budget difficulties and lack of adequate funding from the State of California. We remember when California was among the leaders in the United States in per pupil spending. We lament that California now ranks 38th in per pupil spending with an allocation approximately $1,000 per student less than the national average. Measure EE will help close the gap in funding. We have been fortunate to receive a great foundation from our education in the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District. Members of our family have attended Madison, Roosevelt, McKinley, Grant and Will Rogers Elementary Schools. We have attended both John Adams and Lincoln Middle Schools and SAMOHI. We are proud to include three college graduates, two current college students, a graduate of UCLA Law School as well as a family member that earned his Doctorate in Marine Biology from Stanford University who is now a Research Professor at the University of Maryland. Our family has also benefited greatly from the athletic and music programs in the District, and at SAMOHI in particular. We are concerned that these excellent programs may suffer if Measure EE is not passed, and that these programs will only become available to those who can afford it. Our extracurricular programs must be available to all students, not just those families that have the means to purchase instruments or pay transportation fees. Even though we are not anxious to increase the amount of taxes we pay, the investment in our community is well worth the extra cost. $300 per year is a small amount to pay when weighed against the social costs we all pay when our educational system is not funded adequately enough to educate all members of our community. We believe that the health of our economic system depends upon quality education for all of our children, equal opportunity being a key American value that is critical to our economic success as well as our health as a society. We want our District to continue reducing class sizes in all grades. We support the efforts to increase security on our campuses and provide well-maintained facilities. We want to continue to attract and retain outstanding teachers, as they are the key to our success. We support the taxpayer safeguards included in Measure EE. Measure
EE provides for an independent Financial Oversight Committee to monitor
the District's compliance. An Annual Independent Audit is required and
will be made available to the public. We urge you to vote YES on Measure EE on November 5th. L. Wayne Harding, SAMOHI Class of 1945Dixie Harding, SAMOHI Class of 1945 Christopher Harding, SAMOHI Class of 1970 Mark Harding, SAMOHI Class of 1973 Debbie (Cobo) Harding, SAMOHI Class of 1974 Stacey Harding, SAMOHI Class of 1999 Stephanie Harding, SAMOHI Class of 2001 |
![]() |
Copyright ©1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 surfsantamonica.com. All Rights Reserved. |