Has anyone asked the question, "how many administrators are with the district today that were here during measure Y"?It isn't so much about the stadium as it is about their promise Not to build the stadium if the previous bond passed then going ahead with it. It is about trust. They also promised a new theater and that didn't happen. They told us what we wanted to hear and proceeded to do what they wanted. Giving more money to incompetent leadership will not benefit the kids. Try looking at this bond from a broader prospective than the IT department. Everyone wants the best for the kids but it has to balanced by the economic realities of today. This is the wrong time to take on more debt.
While I may agree with you that this is a difficult time to pass a bond measure, the reality remains that the district is actually in trouble. The tough economic times don't help.
I initially responded to a comment about IT as that's my area of expertise. But, I can also see the way the district is funded and the fallout.
I lay the blame squarely at the doorstep of this state's legislature (union's too but that's another issue). They obviously do not value education. Or, it's just a great hot button to force higher state taxes. Unfortunately, the local residents must fill in the gap. As a society we all benefit from an excellent education system. It is immoral, in my view, not to give today's kids the same opportunity that many of us adults received from a good public education.
I'll add a pet peive...
How is it that we always hear about the importance of funding higher ed? This is even at the expense of K-12. What chaps my hide is that while we have a moral obligation to educate the children (K-12), the 18+ crowd (adults) should be more responsible to pay their own way through higher ed. I worked through college, it's not that tough. Let's educate the youngsters!
Lastly, these folks that keep barking out, "17%(or whatever number you wish to use) of the kids families won't have to pay", as a reason to not vote for the bond. How inane that view is. Turn it over, 83% of the student are Claremont kids and will benefit. So, let's turn our back on the 83% for the sake of the 17%? Doesn't wash, just another empty excuse.