No on A advice requested

Dear Chris;

I don't have any specific examples of SFUSD wasting money although if an independent audit was completed I'm certain inappropriate use of funds would be found as well as friend of the family school bids work repair maintenance contracts and so on.

You may try using the following as examples of what to say or post in rebuttal

Ron Getty - SF Libertarian
Hostis res Publica
*Vote No - On 20 Years of a Special Tax Indexed to Inflation*

This tax measure claims to use a special tax to increase teachers' pay, but not all the taxes raised will go to teacher salaries. Substantial sums will go for such things as non-teaching staff salaries, training programs, technology purchases and school achievement recognition.

The $28.8 million in taxes raised annually is a flat rate per residential and commercial tax parcel. So, based on assessed values, the $500 million building owner and the $500,000 homeowner pay the same special tax increment. Furthermore, based on the language no pass throughs of the tax is allowed to tenents by the landlords.
Senior citizen homeowners whose request is approved by the SFUSD are exempted from the special tax. Yet they still continue to pay the base school property tax -- paying for someone else’s grandchildren attending public school. Parents whose children attend private schools or are home-schooled pay the special tax giving someone else’s children’s
teachers pay raises.

By union regulations, teachers work 35 hours a week and 181 days a year. New teachers start at $43,000, and experienced teachers earn $82,000. At this level of income, SFUSD teachers aren’t street panhandlers who sleep in alleys.

California teachers statewide average $56,000 -- the third highest paid teachers nationally. Department of Labor statistics show City private industry workers average $50,000 compared to City public employees’ average pay and benefits of $85,000.

With declining student enrollment, let's consolidate schools, sell the property for “affordable” rental housing development, and give the land-sale money to the SFUSD for teacher pay raises.

The SFUSD is already spending $360 million of taxpayers’ money on its budget along with a $450 million approved school bond. Stop forcing City taxpayers to be ATMs for the SFUSD.

School Parcel Tax

The school parcel tax is a wolf in sheep’s clothing tax measure which is claiming to use the tax money to increase teachers' pay. However, all the taxes raised won’t go to teacher salaries. Substantial sums will go for non-teaching staff salaries, training programs and technology purchases.

The $28.8 million in taxes raised annually is a flat rate per residential and commercial tax parcel. Based on assessed values the $500 million building owner and the $500,000 homeowner pay the same special tax.

Senior citizen homeowners whose request is approved by the SFUSD are exempted from the special tax yet still continue to pay the base school property tax. Parents whose children attend private schools or are home-schooled pay the special tax giving someone else’s children’s teachers pay raises.

The SFUSD spends $360 million of taxpayers’ money on its budget. Stop using taxpayers as ATMs for the SFUSD.
SCHOOL PARCEL TAX
The school parcel tax is another Robbing Hood measure disguised to raise taxes to increase teachers’ salaries. Not all of the $28.8 million in taxes will go to teacher salaries. Large amounts will pay for non-teaching staff salaries; training programs and school achievement recognition.

New teachers start at $43,000 and experienced teachers can earn $82,000. SFUSD teachers aren’t street panhandlers who sleep in alleys.

California teachers statewide average $56,000 the third highest pay nationally. Statistics from the Department of Labor show City private industry workers average $50,000. City public employees’ average pay and benefits is $85,000.

With declining student enrollment consolidate schools. Sell the property for “affordable” rental housing development. Give the land-sale money to the SFUSD specifically for teacher pay raises.

Vote no on 20 years of a special tax indexed to inflation. SFUSD spends $360 million and should stop being like Oliver Twist always asking for more.

Thanks very much, Ron. Audits have, in fact, found examples of waste in
the past. However, I decided to spin the Yes on A slogan; below is what
I posted in our kitchen. I also put up a Phillies handbill for good
measure. (I thought about posting a McCain poster to really drive home
the point that turning the kitchen into a political forum may not have
been what whoever it was who posted the flier intended, but decided to
stick with things I actually support.)

Every Child Deserves a Great Teacher

Proposition A will not give it to them.

There is no correlation between educational spending and educational
quality.

Prop. A does not mandate all its money goes to teacher salaries; other
uses include school recognition programs.

The SF Unified School District has a long history of wasting money on
contractors and emergency maintenance after deferring necessary ongoing
maintenance. Then they come back to the taxpayers begging for emergency
money. Every time. Why will this one be different?

The tax is $198 per parcel, not pro-rated by assessment; RREEF and you
(or your landlord) will pay the same tax. And over twenty years, the
inflation-indexed tax will keep rising; you will still be paying $400,
$500, or $600 above your other taxes twenty years from now if this
passes. And so will whoever owns 631 Howard.

Landlords are forbidden to pass the tax on to their tenants—which means
more Ellis Act evictions, more small property owners getting out of the
rental business, and more elderly people with investment property
working well past retirement age.

SFUSD should consolidate its schools with their ever-decreasing
enrollment, focus on quality, and stop wasting our money.

Every Child Deserves a Great Teacher

Vote No on A on June 3rd

Great, Chris!

Best, Michael