 |
CAMPAIGN FOR EXCELLENCE |
|
|
|
Palo Alto Daily News Published May 9, 2005 Editor: David Lieberman (Letters, May 7) opposes Measure A, which provides critical funding for Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD), claiming central administrators are overpaid. Lieberman doesn’t mention that funds from Measure A cannot be used for PAUSD central administration. Nor does he mention that PAUSD administrative compensation is in line with comparable school districts and that PAUSD has cut administrator positions by 13% in recent years.
The truth is that Measure A has nothing to do with administrative salaries. Rather, it provides vital funding to maintain current class sizes, avoid teacher layoffs, and reverse a fraction of the $6.5M in cuts to our public schools in the last three years. Voting “no” on Measure A will have absolutely no effect on administrator salaries. But it could lead to layoffs of over 100 teachers, significant increases in class size, reductions in course offerings, and the closure of a school. Don't believe it? See what’s happened to other school districts that rejected parcel taxes in the face of the funding shortfalls affecting most public schools in California. PAUSD’s current parcel tax expires next year; voting “no” on a replacement means the loss of $5.5M a year to our schools.
If voters want PAUSD to reduce compensation for senior leadership, they should lobby the school board or elect new board members in the upcoming election. But anyone who cares about the quality of public education in Palo Alto should vote “yes” on Measure A.
Jon Foster Channing Avenue
|
|
Send mail to
webmaster@campaignforexcellence.org with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
