Wednesday, August 4, 2010

Measure C: Statement from the CUES committee

Today we received a message from Jenny Reik, a CUES committee member. CUES has a statement related to the recent events:

CUES Committee statement

August 3, 2010

MDUSD Community -

For the past several weeks, there has been wide speculation and much misinformation regarding the handling of the opinion poll we commissioned prior to the Measure C election. This matter has become a needless distraction and is inhibiting the progress that the voters demanded with their overwhelming approval of Measure C. As such, our committee is compelled to release the poll so we can put this matter to rest. The full report of it can be found on our site: www.protectourlocalschools.org

The election is over and the voters have spoken. We urge the Times and the District leadership to get beyond this trivial matter and focus their attention and energy on the key issue: how can we best use our resources to improve our children’s education?

The success of Measure C is proof that the community remains steadfast in support of our kids. The CUES committee will continue its work to build on that success and construct stronger, more productive channels of communication between the District and the community at large. We welcome all parents and members of our community to join us in that effort. Please visit www.protectourlocalschools.org to learn more.

Sincerely,

Citizens United for Excellent Schools

17 comments:

  1. "We urge the Times and the District leadership to get beyond this trivial matter and focus their attention and energy on the key issue: how can we best use our resources to improve our children’s education?"

    This is not a trivial manner. This $383 million dollar bond will end up costing taxpayers $1.87 billion dollars, which will be a tremendous drain on our future resources. Restructuring the bond to pay it off sooner could save a BILLION dollars.

    The way to best use our resources to support the education of our children (and children 20 years from now) would be to modify this bond structure so the interest will not be so astronomical and this money could be put better use. Instead of paying investment bankers a billion dollars, this billion dollars could be used for the education of our children.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "We urge the Times and the District leadership to get beyond this trivial matter and focus their attention and energy on the key issue: how can we best use our resources to improve our children’s education?"

    This is not a trivial manner. This $383 million dollar bond will end up costing taxpayers $1.87 billion dollars, which will be a tremendous drain on our future resources. Restructuring the bond to pay it off sooner could save a BILLION dollars.

    The way to best use our resources to support the education of our children (and children 20 years from now) would be to modify this bond structure so the interest will not be so astronomical and this money could be put better use. Instead of paying investment bankers interest, this billion dollars could be used for the education of our children.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm just waiting for the next scandal. You know there will be one with this board. November could not get here fast enough.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Interesting that people are now looking forward to November. When Gary McHenry and April Treece were here, some of you couldn't wait until they left and we got a new superintendent and a new "board majority." FYI The grass is not always greener on the other side!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Annon 8:42
    OUCH !

    ReplyDelete
  6. So 8:42 are you suggesting, Gary McHenry, and April Treece are better than this???? Hello, how quickly those have forgotten. Does Grand Jury ring a bell? You thought you don't know anything now, you knew NOTHING then. I will take this over that any day. The whole world is just angry now, that's the big difference between 2008 and 2010.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The election is over. The public knew about the cost of the bond and voted for it anyway.

    Get over it people and let's move on. There is no scandal. Maybe things weren't handled as best as they could be, but as the Times pointed out over and over again--nothing was illegal.

    ReplyDelete
  8. to those who are so disgruntled - filing deadline for the board is tomorrow, 5 P.M., 3 seats are open and only two people have filed so far.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Annon 7:27
    Theresa reported that the deadline for non-incumbents is Aug 11 because Dick is not running, not tomorrow. Do you have different information ?
    Doctor J

    ReplyDelete
  10. It is true that the deadline for nonincumbents is extended to Aug. 11 in races where at least one incumbent does not file. Incumbents must file by Friday.
    As of last night, there are now five candidates who have taken out papers: Linda Mayo, Paul Strange, Jeff Adams, Roy Larkin and Lynne Dennler.
    Larkin was the only one who had filed by the end of the day Wednesday. Mayo and Adams both told me they intend to file.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Larkin, Mayo and Adams would not require an election. But if you add either Strange or Dennler to the mix, then the District will cough up another $150-$200 k for the election. That's a couple of teaching positions. What a shame. Disn't the Bond election cost the District almost $300 k ?
    Doctor J

    ReplyDelete
  12. I don't believe the district pays for a board election Dr. J. the candidates do. I think your wrong on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The District does pay for elections - about $150,000 for a regular election as I recall. The candidates have to pay the filing fees and marketing/promotional costs. Of course, the candidates or their campaign committees can solicit contributions to help cover the costs.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If Strange goes in, then I'm pulling papers to run against him. If he stays out, then I will.

    -Joe Smith

    ReplyDelete
  15. Annon 5:56
    I am sorry but you are not correct. The county charges any agency that has an election going on.
    Doctor J

    ReplyDelete
  16. Joe Smith- What makes you so great? Why should we vote for you?

    ReplyDelete
  17. The Bond Campaign payback has started. Theresa reports: "the board is set to award a $25,000 contract to Jack Schreder & Assoc. of Sacto, which gave $2,000 to the campaign: http://esbpublic.mdusd.k12.ca.us/public_itemview.aspx?ItemId=2806&mtgId=272.
    The staff report doesn’t give any indication that this contract was competitively bid. It also doesn’t explain whose idea it was to request a school closure study or how Schreder & Assoc. was chosen for the contract." What is wrong with competitive bidding to save some money. And why is there no committee appointed ? Wasn't that supposed to happen in June ?
    Doctor J

    ReplyDelete