From the Wave Blog: According to the 9-30-2010 460 on file with the San Diego County Registrar of Voters; the proponents of the $150 million dollar facilities bond Proposition P, (that the Encinitas Union School District has placed on the November 2 ballot) the Committee for Encinitas Schools has raised $38,700 from only 8 donations; 6 out of 8 of these donations are from vendors of the district, legal firms, construction companies and consultants that will benefit most by passage of Prop P. The vendor’s investment $38,500 has a financial return of $150 million dollars over 30 years. The remaining $200 balance of donations is by two incumbents. Our we to understand that, out of the thousands of families with students currently enrolled in EUSD not one parent of one student donated even one dollar toward the passage of Prop P?
Don’t let six vendors and two incumbents mislead you into assuming $150 million dollars in debt for buildings. Defeat Prop P and ask the school district to return next spring [with a better measure].
Loren Nancarrow works for Sequoia Solar now. He signed to the Prop P ballot argument too.
Anybody know who the contributors are? Sequoia?
I wonder if the district is going to have an open and competitive process for the solar and farm contract, if P Passes? Anybody want to email the district directors to find out? ... Bill?
Looks like the School District operates like the City. WTF?
ReplyDeleteVote out the incumbents, our school district needs improvement. Its a union sleep zone for teachers.
The school districts use all our tax dollars now collected to pay for salaries, pensions and medical benefits. Don't fall for this phony tax increase. Funny how the state was able to build one of the best school systems in the world only to have these clowns, both democrats and republicans ruin it.
ReplyDeleteLoren is a LOSER! He can't even get the weather right on a rainy day!
ReplyDeleteEverybodys' chasing the almighty buck - even ths guy.
ReplyDeleteIs there an organized opposition to Prop P? Do I have to make my own Vote No on Prop P yard sign?
ReplyDeleteMr. Happy is just another money grubber - sad...
ReplyDeleteProp P is a loser. 150 million for projects we can do without at a time that we are all faced with living within our means.
ReplyDeleteIt has become all to familiar that school districts are funding all their shortfalls with bonds. That is not sustainable. Bonds aren't free money, they do need to be paid back.
This proposition wants to fund new construction on the Quail Gardens Site for a "learning Center" that is in no way essential, in a time of budget cuts and extreme measures.
Sorry, but I'm not convinced this is essential.
The opposition is just another piece of work of Mike Andreen. Prop P is NOT a tax increase. It extends a bond that we approved many years ago. Our schools are among the best in California because we understand that good schools not only are good for our children, but also increase our property values.
ReplyDeleteNot only is the incumbent canidadte (Marla Strich) a rubber-stamping lackey for these guys, but they've trotted out two more candidates who used to work there and who will surely do/be the same way. Emily Andrade was a principal at EUSD, as was Gregg Sonken. Does anybody think that two retired principals are going to make ANY WAVES? Of course not. That's why the supt. and his cronies want them to win. The three parents who are running would be way to independent-minded for his taste. How could he continue his pet projects with no oversight if a majority of the school board was to actually ask questions?
ReplyDeleteSAVE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT - DO NOT VOTE FOR ANDRADE, SONKEN, OR STRICH!
Vote for Sonken, Andrade and Strich. They are running because they care about education. Others are aligned with our incumbent city "leaders" who want power and secrecy in government.
ReplyDeleteElecting retired school employees is like having the wolf guard the pension house.
ReplyDeleteI agree; SAVE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT -DO NOT VOTE FOR ANDRADE, SONKEN, OR STRICH!
I agree with left coast. Bring back a bond focused on school building improvements, not fancy phones and computors; and I will vote yes on that one.
ReplyDeleteI am not wasting bonding capacity on a loser program like this one. Who Scoped the proposed bond improvements? They should be fired!
Prop P is not the problem. The schools need the money. The problem is the current Board and Administration and their rubber stamped free spending. The items that the district would like to spend the money on are their WISH LIST and not what the Board is required to spend the money on if the Prop P Tax is passed. It is the Board that is being elected on November 2, 2010 that will determine how the money will be spent. If you elect Strich, Andrade and Sonken I agree that we will have more of the same and I agree that Prop P should not pass. On the other hand if you elect Gray, Martorana and McCorkle you will have three fiscally responsible people that will not waste money on a solar project who's only purpose is to convert bond money by creating savings that can be used in the operating budget regardless of what the cost of the project is to the taxpayers.
ReplyDelete