Vote yes on CL
Join the discussion below, or Read more at Inland Valley Daily Bulletin.
#1 Oct 21, 2010
Teachers in Claremont have often disagreed with the School Board. This list of School Board members have often disagreed among themselves over issues. The one thing we all agree on is the there is a giant need in Claremont and Measure CL will meet that need.
Our state funding was cut from $54 million a year 5 years ago to $50 million a yea this year. More students with less resources. Teachers took a $1,500 pay cut this year and next year to help balance the budget, but we still do not have enough to help meet our needs.
Measure CL will pay for the needed upgrades to help keep Claremont academically competitive.
Teachers, former board members, Sustainable Claremont, the Claremont Chamber of Commerce, the Daily Bulletin, the Claremont Chapter of the League of Women Voters have all come out in support of Measure CL. Such a broad range of support shows that Measure CL has merit.
#2 Oct 21, 2010
FIVE MYTHS ABOUT MEASURE CL
MYTH: Measure CL will only raise your taxes by $45 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
FACT:The $45 figure is an estimate that is based on current interest rates, which are near record lows. There is no guarantee that rates will be so low when the bonds are actually sold. In fact, they may be much higher – and so will your tax bill. THERE IS NO LIMIT ON HOW HIGH YOUR PROPERTY TAX BILL CAN GO UP TO PAY FOR MEASURE CL.
MYTH: There is a specific list of projects that Measure CL funds will be spent on.
FACT: Actually, there is no list. The text of Measure CL is so broadly written that the district will have almost unlimited discretion to decide how to spend the money. As we saw with Measure Y, the district can choose to spend bond funds on everything except leaky roofs and faulty wiring. MEASURE CL IS A BLANK CHECK.
MYTH: Solar Power will save up to $100,000 per year in electricity bills.
FACT: The district intends to install a solar power system that will reduce electricity costs by up to $100,000 per year – or $2 million over 20 years. However, the solar power system will cost far more than the $2 million savings. In fact, based on similar projects, it will probably cost at least $4 million. MEASURE CL'S SOLAR POWER PROJECTS WILL END UP COSTING TAXPAYERS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
MYTH: An Independent Citizen’s Oversight Committee will ensure proper use of funds.
FACT: California law mandates that a Citizen’s Oversight Committee be appointed by the school board to monitor the use of bond funds. The committee has no power to stop inappropriate expenditures or direct funds to be spent on particular projects. THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE CANNOT ENSURE THAT FUNDS ARE USED PROPERLY - IT CAN ONLY GIVE ADVICE THAT THE DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION IS FREE TO IGNORE.
MYTH: Our schools need this money, and there is no alternative to Measure CL.
FACT: Bond financing is just one way to raise funds for Claremont schools. It also happens to be the most expensive and inflexible way. There are better alternatives, including the sale of surplus real estate, state and federal grants, and a parcel tax. EXPENSIVE BOND FINANCING IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT.
#3 Oct 22, 2010
1. "Our state funding was cut from $54 million a year 5years ago to $50 million a year this year. More students with less resources."
Claremont Teacher's assertion about "more students with less resources" does not explain why the district is importing almost 20% students from other communities. We would not have "more students" if we did not import students from other districts. Consequently we would not have the problem of "more students with less resources". We may actually have just the right size of student population if we did not engage in this 20% inter-district transfers. Could it be we have more teachers than we need?
2. "Teachers took a $1,500 pay check this year..."
CL is being sold as a facilities upgrades bond. Yet Claremont Teacher believes that the bond money will restore teacher salaries. Two notes: Claremont Teacher is either misinformed, because bond funds are not supposed to be used for teacher salaries, or he/she is duped into believing that CL will save teacher salaries. Even if the latter were the case - and that is the contention of bond proponents - the teachers should be cognizant of the real fact that the state may not give the district any more money, and therefore, there may not be any potential residue from CL funds into the general fund to pay teacher salaries. Teachers should be ware and not be duped by claims that Measure CL will be good for them.
3. "Measure CL will pay for needed upgrades to help keep Claremont academically competitive."
How does fixing doors, windows, etc. "help keep Claremont academically competitive"? There is no correlation between pretty buildings and academic achievement. Therefore, this assertion is misguided at best, or false at worst.
Overall, Claremont Teacher and proponents of Measure CL are playing a magic trick on the voters. They draw the voters attention to "kids" and academic achievement in order to accomplish the trick of approving the expensive $95 million bond measure. The Claremont voters are not buying this trick. This taxpayer, for one, will definitely not be reluctant to vote NO on CL.
#4 Oct 22, 2010
I voted yes on measure Y and now I wonder why. Until the CUSD becomes more honest and transparent, I am voting no on Measure CL.
So many supporters of the bond dismiss the idea of a parcel tax which would at least be a pay as we go system. I have to live within my means, the school district should do the same.
#5 Oct 22, 2010
Jeanne, you don't get it. Measure CL has NOTHING to do with the kids or their education. The devil is in the details. We only have the borrowing capacity of $35million to begin with. You have that money earmarked and nothing will go toward roofing repairs, asbestos abatement, theatre project, technology or solar panels. You guys are feverishly trying to pay off bad debt, bad decisions and poor planning in the past. Claremont is onto you and we aren't sitting idle.
You guys need to go back to the drawing board. Come up with a plan that really benefits the children.
#6 Oct 24, 2010
I have two boys in Claremont schools and know that they need some help. My son's resource room at Sycamore is the pits. It is not even suppose to be a classroom. Come on Claremont and pass this thing.
#7 Oct 25, 2010
Hopefully, this endorsement from former school board members will be as effective as the former mayors' endorsement of Bridget Healy was in the City Council election! The final nail in the coffin for CL would be for Ellen Taylor to pen a letter of support of CL on behalf of the League of Women Voters!
#8 Oct 25, 2010
The Sumner RSP room is just as bad. I am sad to think of the kids who have to go there. Luckily my children at Sumner did not, but this is bad for kids. Plese vote yes on CL.
Add your comments below
|UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10)||6 hr||Trojan||35,115|
|Crime and Public Safety, January 13 (Jan '10)||Wed||Mr Smith||18|
|Pomona policea s human trafficking and prostitu...||Wed||Derrick johnson||1|
|Two critically injured during San Dimas house p... (Jul '09)||Dec 11||DontactPrivileged||23|
|Karen Davis is a fraud!||Dec 11||Erase Chris Jeffers||6|
|Dirty snapchat!! (Oct '16)||Dec 11||Supervirals||14|
|Family devastated after Rancho Cucamonga grandm...||Dec 10||Wildchild||13|
Find what you want!
Search Claremont Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC