NO Bond for EUHSD wrote on Apr 16, 2008 8:16 AM:EUHSD has to cut 3 million from the budget, we're in the midst of a recession and they want to float a bond measure? If they don't have the money to keep these people in their jobs, what makes them think they will have the money to run and hire people for the new facilities? And, just who do they think will be paying on the bonds? Could it be the Escondido property owners who are already paying on several other school, police, fire and hospital bonds? EUHSD if you are tightening your belts, just think about the property owners in your district that are trying to hold on to their homes, pay their property taxes with the existing bonds, pay the higher food costs and keep gas in the car. How can they afford your pie in the sky bond?

Concerned wrote on Apr 16, 2008 9:59 AM:The district claims they want to keep the cuts "as far away from the classroom as possible", then they propose to layoff 25 Teachers and 17 Instructional Aids! You can't get any closer to the classroom than those positions. The Public Relations Officer is more valuable to a student's education than their classroom teachers and instructional assistants? Where are the Administrative cuts?

To "No Bond" wrote on Apr 16, 2008 10:37 AM:I couldn't agree more. I am also appalled that our schools have gotten to this point while our city council continues to approve new housing developments. The council will tell you that development pays for itself, how, by paying to put school bonds on the ballot?

Place blame in the right place. wrote on Apr 16, 2008 11:11 AM:I don't understand why people are attacking the school district. The bond measures these desperate school districts are trying to pass are a direct result of the State's mandates. Our governor is taking money away from out kids! He's illegally taking money out of Prop 98 that voters overwhelmingly passed to keep money from being taken from our schools. Apparently a law is only a law if State Congress says it is. Why are we attacking our school boards? I would hate to be one of them. They can't win!

blame the right people wrote on Apr 16, 2008 2:22 PM:Screaming and shouting at the school board is fruitless. Look around yourself when you're at the a red-light or in the grocery store. It's all of the people who you see every day that decided it would be a good idea to vote for a steriod-abusing, pot smoking, ill-educated governor who are responsable for the budget cuts that have put other civil servants in this position.

Lisap wrote on Apr 16, 2008 3:48 PM:I think the blame goes to our liberal legislature in Sacramento. Our Government collects more than enough money to adequately educate our kids and take care of the other responsibilities of government. However, the liberals cannot help but fund social program after social program. Spend money more wisely, and there is plenty to spend on schools.

Sam wrote on Apr 16, 2008 5:07 PM:Hmmm, in any SANE organization, be it a school district or the private sector, "public relations" is usually the first to get cut during a budget crisis - because it's non-essential.

Are teachers less essential than a public relations administrator? I think not.

Karl wrote on Apr 16, 2008 5:13 PM:"blame the right people" Tell us how you really feel. I am so tired of your kind of lament. The governor is cutting 10% across the board. Should another government program take a 20% hit so that the schools don't have to take a 10% hit? We only have so much money and the Democratic house, senate and govenors in the past spent more than they brought in. It is time to pay the piper. I wonder how much of the 10% is actually a cut after figuring in the cola raise.

To LisaP wrote on Apr 16, 2008 6:19 PM:You hit the proverbial nail on the head. Considering the lack of media coverage from this perspective, it appears Californian's have completely overlooked the root cause of California's economic disaster. Democratic legislators have allowed this to happen over time as they've attempted to fund every imaginable program.

At the same time, and as a true conservative, I wholeheartedly blame the so-called republicans in Congress for the out-of-control spending of the federal government. I can't agree more with your post.

to karl wrote on Apr 16, 2008 8:33 PM:If you knew anything about the cola raise and the budget proposed by the governator you'd know that he is going to give a cola raise, but then he's going to take back an even greater percentage, nearly 2% above his cola increase. But nice job trying to lay blame other than where it belongs. Moreover, California is 48th in per student spending. In case you were unaware Karl the union now has 50 states. So try to do that math. Cutting in to an already incredibly underfunded entity is just the right move. But do like your heroes at fox news and yell a little louder about it being the Democratic house's fault and it will seem like you're right.

bryan wrote on Apr 16, 2008 10:37 PM:The schools need to make do with less. The public school system is broken and each year is getting worse while we send more tax dollars to these insane bureaucrats. Their goal is to make as many painful cuts as possible to have as much impact on the kids and parents as possible in hope that enough parents will call the governor. Why not cut the waste in administration departments first leave the classrooms last in line for cuts. The government destroys any program it gets its hands on. We need more local/city/county control and less state and federal. At the same time the liberals want to expand the federal government and build a nanny state where the federal government will raise our kids. Government has an inherent need to get larger over time and fosters inefficiencies. Tax payers pay $8700 a year per child for k-12 public education.. I have two kids, I could easily find a better education for my kids using this $18,000 rather than let the sate waste it away.

Sports wrote on Apr 17, 2008 8:26 AM:Down size the sports budget and pass it to the teaching side....

to "to karl" wrote on Apr 17, 2008 8:54 AM:So, the actual cut is only 2%? Wow, not nearly as bad as what we have heard. Glad someone is finally being honest about what a "cut" is and what a decrease in an increase is. Also others have published that CA is not 48th, mainly because that number is "adjusted" for a bunch of things, not just pure dollars spent per child, but it makes it seem worse if the worst case numbers are used. Bottom line is, elected state officials, both Republican and Democrat (although I have to say the Democrats have far more control over this than the Republicans), at the direction of every special interest group that can spend a dime, has spent money with little or no planning for the future. Same at the federal level. Which is no real surprise, since they were elected by people that have ALSO spent money with little or no planning for THEIR futures (i.e. the foreclosure and credit crisis). Seems to me a LOT of chickens are coming home to roost, and unfortunately a there will be a LOT of folks that suffer while the piper is being paid. Will the people do what is required to fix this? Only time will tell.