If you believe the PUSD must right-size infrastructure and staff and clean up corruption on the Board of Education and the inside deals over poverty funds before taxing local homeowners a second time within an 18-month period, YOU MUST VOTE "NO" BY MAY 4th in the special "all-mail ballot" election!
Throwing away your ballot after you receive it in the mail is as good as a "yes" vote for PUSD's Measure CC parcel tax.
The odd couple who brought you PUSD's $350m Measure TT just 18 months ago, Pasadena Educational Foundation's George Brumder and ACORN's Peter Dreier, once again are at work campaigning for PUSD's proposed Measure CC parcel tax.
In defending the district's appeal for more tax revenue on such quick turn-around, Messrs. Brumder and Dreier claim the PUSD is a "model district . . . committed to full transparency and accountability."
Really? Consider this:
1) The same evening (1/26/10) the PUSD Board approved a parcel tax election, financial auditors presented them with a "qualified" 2009 Financial Audit finding the district deficient in anti-fraud controls and oversight processes and recommending ethics and fraud training programs throughout the district.
2) Recent district meetings have revealed 70% in contingency reserves built into the $350m TT bond, with a percentage of bond sales "reserved for wealthy local investors;" the Board now is in the process of determining policy for "reallocating" the excess revenue intentionally designed into Measure TT before it went to voters in November 2008.
3) While the Board continues to build new middle schools, as many as sixteen (16) district sites have been identified for consideration as potential "surplus" status following the 7-11 Committee's 2006 report showing classroom space for 27,077 students; yet PUSD's average daily attendance (ADA) is presently calculated at 18,728 students.
4) The district received $22m in federal stimulus money this past year, used just to maintain the status quo, an error in judgment recently conceded by PUSD's top administrative staff but still defended by a majority of Board members.
5) Three weeks ago Board member Honowitz capitalized on a poorly attended subcommittee meeting (3/10/10) to sneak-in a Pacoima/Sylmar-styled "community schools" poverty program at Washington School, a program through which Mr. Honowitz' wife is employed; with Mrs. Honowitz' name in printed material, Board President Selinske nonetheless directed Mr. Honowitz "to take the lead" in implementing his own wife's, no-bid poverty program in the PUSD.
6) Since favors go in many directions on the Board of Education, expect more hi-jinx involving programmatic experiments, increased costs and low academic performance among the district's most vulnerable students.
And if all of the above weren't bad enough, consider the conduct of PEF's Mr. Brumder and ACORN's Mr. Dreier in betraying senior homeowners with their promotion of Measure CC's non-existent "senior exemption."
The text of Measure CC states clearly that the so-called "senior exemption" is available only to seniors with W-2's qualifying under "very low income" calculations used for Section 8 housing "rental" assistance (p.A-3), by definition precluding qualification by taxpaying senior homeowners.
In phone conversation with Mr. Brumder a few weeks ago I attempted to draw his attention to some of the above before he went to the public with misinformation. He asked: "What's that got to do with the parcel tax?"
EVERYTHING, MR. BRUMDER!
Mary Dee Romney