npr edvertisers
visitors movie times

Santa Barbara Weather: 56.5°F | Humidity: 49% | Pressure: 30.03in (Rising) | Conditions: Scattered Clouds | Wind Direction: SSE | Wind Speed: 0.9mph [see map]

Free Newsletter
  login You create the news! Send items of interest to ed@edhat.com
    17761 Subscribers
      524 Paid (3.0%)
     68 Commenters
     167904 Page Views

Buy Edhat Bags
Buy Edhat Bags
Buy Edhat Shirts
Buy Edhat Shirts
Advertise on Edhat
Advertise on Edhat
Buy Edhat Hats
Buy Edhat Hats
News Events Referrals Deals Classifieds Comments About

Message from Superintendent Cash
updated: Nov 07, 2012, 5:50 PM

Source: Unified School District

Superintendent Cash is out of the district but sent the following message re the outcome of parcel tax Measures A & B.

"Last night was a wonderful night for the children in Santa Barbara! It's thrilling to see the results of the great work in support of kids in our schools with the passage of Measures A & B.

"With the passage of Proposition 30, we will have the opportunity to meet with our employee associations to negotiate the impact of the proposition. We won't know the financial impact until the Governor and the Legislature act in response to Proposition 30. This may take several weeks, and we will not know the outcome until December or January. As soon as we know more, we will share that information."

David E. Cash, Superintendent Santa Barbara Unified School District

Comments in order of when they were received | (reverse order)

 COMMENT 340366 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-07 06:12 PM

I'm a landlord in SB, and of course I'll be passing along the higher tax to my tenants in the form of rent increases.


 COMMENT 340375 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-07 06:38 PM

Of course you will. You didn't get this far just to share some of your security with your community. That contribution toward education of our children would've nearly ruined you I'm sure, good thing you can pass it on to those... tenants. Incidentally, I've just had my rent increased, and it pleases me to think perhaps this difference will go toward some kid learning the clarinet. But that's why I'm me, and you're you, 366. Good luck!


 COMMENT 340376 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-07 06:42 PM

I can't believe how much hate there is!
This benefits the children. But, please do raise the rent on your tenants...who I am sure have the same kids who will benefit from this prop! Ay ay ay...It never ends.

The rich think they're so entitled...just because they have money. Be grateful you're alive. Who cares about money. It doesn't go with you when you die!


 COMMENT 340382 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-07 06:51 PM

Wow $93 extra parcel fee this year. Times must be tough Mr. Landlord. So you pass on that massive tax as a $7.75 per month rent increase. Shrewed business indeed.


 COMMENT 340391P agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-07 07:43 PM

Well, I don't have kids-but I vote for what is right for all, not just for myself-so I supported the increase in tax. I didn't think about my rent going up-the lion's share of our income goes to the landlord-who owns several properties. Between my husband and I, we have four jobs. I wonder if we are going to be eating "it" again....help! Landlords, please give us a break...some of us are working ourselves to death just to pay our rent!


 MESARATS agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-07 09:40 PM

I wonder if it was a1/2 or 1/4 of a cent sales tax how many people would have voted for it. It would have been dead in the water. I think everyone should contribute to public education not just the " evil property owners and landlords". Santa Barbara seems to hate user taxes, but loves a parcel tax. Owning rental property is not a guaranteed cash cow in this town and some are lucky to break even. Many who rent are oblivious to the costs it takes to keep thing running let alone improvements, getting through the process and building permits can be exorbitant. Why should it not be passed on to the renters? Then they can feel good about their contribution to the local schools too.


 COMMENT 340464 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 07:44 AM

I do not have children, but pay tens of thousands dollars each year to educate other people's children, while parents get tens of thousands dollars in tax breaks. I actually support public education, but what I don't support are the financial shell games played by career school bureaucrats. At the same time the school district is crying poverty and begging the taxpayers for more, they put a new copper cupola on Peabody, new roads for La Colina, a new kitchen for Santa Barbara High, a complete remodel for San Marcos along with many other costly projects. For most homeowners who are having financial difficulties, the first impulse is probably not to do a major remodel on their home. It would be nice if our elected officials could learn similar restraint when spending other people's money. It would also be nice if parents could forgo that new BMW or Escalade and at least pay an equal share for their own children's education.


 COMMENT 340476 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 07:59 AM

464 doesn't understand how taxes and bonds work and all the categories of funds that school districts work with. All the remodeling items 464 mentions are from a separate bond that was passed a few years ago. The bond was for facilities only and that is what it is being used for.
The parcel tax is not for facilities like you mention.


 COMMENT 340483 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 08:26 AM

I agree, this should have been a sales tax, not a parcel tax. To isolate only the parcel owners seems does not seem fair. Being a parcel owner, the school in our district is so horrible, we have to pay for private school.


 COMMENT 340485P agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 08:32 AM

464 was spot on. It doesn't matter how many games you play with "this money is just for this," the reality is that public money is regularly spent in non-frugal ways. There are too many bureaucrats, and too many special projects and districts, and not enough common sense and intelligent budgeting and spending.

Public employees are able to retire too young with too many benefits, and there are too many of them. I'd like to be able to eliminate some of the non-teaching staff and adjust the generous benefits, and then use those savings on true educational improvement.

I was educated here in the 60s & 70s, at the height of CA's educational arc. We did not have an entire county educational office full of non-teachers, attendance monitors, school security staff, and all these other extras. There was a principal and teachers, and my education was far better than what is being offered currently. Hold everyone accountable (including parents and children) and go back to the core mission. Throwing money at a broken system doesn't repair the system, it just delays the inevitable.


 COMMENT 340490 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 08:44 AM

485 I went through the SB schools in the 1960's and completely agree with you!


 COMMENT 340524 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 09:28 AM

Double the funding four our public schools and they will still suck. Maybe we should start educating the parents and not the kids. I bet we will see better results.


 RESIDENT agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 09:39 AM

485 and 490 bring up a good point and that is too much bureaucracy in the school system to funnel off the money we already pay in taxes before it ever gets to the teachers and children.

Can anyone explain why, in SB County, we have a County Superintendent of Education, with a layer of bureaucracy, as well as a Superintendent and their bureaucracy for each school district and a Principal (and a bunch of Vice-Principals, etc.) for each and every school? It would seem that the County Education office is redundant.


 COMMENT 340539P agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 09:40 AM

You hit the nail on the head, 524!

If people who had children all parented well, there would be far fewer problems in the classrooms and the overall school climate would start turning around pronto.

Sadly, though, as the saying goes, "You parent the way you were parented."

Kids are "in school" from birth learning how to parent.


 COMMENT 340545P agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 09:49 AM

In regard to measure A & B. I voted yes for the one that pertains to me because I care about children and their future. I have no children and I am a property owner who already pays property tax to support public education.

What I don't understand is how non property owners get to vote on issues that raise my taxes. I live right in between Goleta and Santa Barbara, yet I do not have a say in their city elections or politics. But thousands of transient UCSB students and renters across Santa Barbara get to tack on more to my property tax bill...


 COMMENT 340549 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 09:54 AM

476, you obviously missed the point of my post. It is precisely the 'taxes and bonds' and 'all the categories of funds' that I mean when I use the term 'financial shell games'. The schools have their hands in every tax revenue stream. Federal income taxes, state income taxes, corporate income taxes, capital gains taxes, property taxes, personal property taxes, building permit fees, bed tax, state lottery. The list is endless. But even with all these revenue sources, the schools never seem to have enough. The reason for that is simple. The people spending the money never experience any personal consequences when the money is wasted.


 COMMENT 340667P agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 02:14 PM

How does anyone justify passing these measures? If your child was continuously running out of money and going nowhere but downhill would you continue to throw money their way without expecting some lifestyle changes? Yes children need education but more money is not going to fix the bad decisions being made by the school district. Teachers should get top pay, administration should be streamlined and positions cut to the bare minimum. Like any organization there should be consequences for poor performance. Without it what is the incentive to improve?


 COMMENT 340669 agree helpful negative off topic

2012-11-08 02:16 PM

I'm okay with renters voting for parcel tax increases, because as has been noted above, the landlords will just pass any tax increases along as rent increases. So the renters are obviously okay with the increases, or just not thinking that far ahead. The rest of us are hoping that the property taxes we pay are giving a good education to the kids, and that they can get good jobs and pay taxes themselves so that us older folks can be supported by social security and medicare. Give a little, get a little.

It seems like it would be easy to compare the school system admin costs in the 1960s to what they are now, and then have someone explain the differences. If we could see those data, we would have a better base upon which to decide how to vote in the future.

One thing- no more votes for bond issues that are dedicated to specific causes. They end up by having us spend money on stupid things during financial crises. Have you seen all those new buildings at UCSB lately?


39% of comments on this page were made by Edhat Community Members.



Add Your Comments

Edhat Username



Don't have an Account?

Don't know if you have an account?

Don't remember your account info?


ENJOY HAPPY HOUR! ... Between 4:00pm & 5:00pm only happy comment are allowed on the Edhat Comments Board.

If you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all.

Hide Your Handle, but show paid status (paid subscribers only)
NEW - use verified name and picture (contact ed@edhat.com to be verified)
Find out About Becoming A Paid Subscriber
NOTE: We are testing a new Comment Preview Page. You must hit OK on the next page to have your comment go live. Send Feedback to ed@edhat.com.

get a handle   |  lost handle




# # # #


Send To a Friend
Your Email
Friend's Email

Top of Page | Old News Archives | Printer-Friendly Page

  Home Subscribe FAQ Jobs Contact copyright © 2003-2015  
Edhat, Inc.