Published June 1, 2005
Editorial:
YES on Measure A to avert schools crisis
Parcel tax vote June 7 is a critical turning point toward either
rebuilding school quality or plunging it further downward
Tuesday's vote on a $493 annual parcel tax for Palo Alto schools is more than
just another tax measure.
If it wins the required two-thirds voter approval, it will be a major step
toward rebuilding some of the quality that has been eroded by $6.5 million in
budget cuts in the last few years. It will be the same kind of "vote of
confidence" in the teachers and administrators -- those who have made Palo Alto
schools outstanding investments in the future of our children -- that the
original $293 parcel tax vote was in 2001.
If Measure A is defeated, it will be a devastating blow to the morale of
teachers, administrators, school staff and the thousands of parents and others
who have dedicated their time and often money to shoring up the quality in the
face of the erosion that has afflicted schools statewide for the past quarter
century.
In recent weeks, the Weekly has published letters and Guest Opinion columns for
and against Measure A, which are available to review on the Weekly's community
Web site, www.PaloAltoOnline.com. One column reported on an independent
calculation of school expenditures over the next six years -- the life of the
parcel tax -- and showed that budget trimming must occur even if the tax is
approved.
This proposed tax fully replaces the $293 parcel tax approved by voters in
2001, which was billed explicitly as a way to raise teacher pay to help them
stay afloat in the high-cost Palo Alto area. Opponents now claim that, among
other things, Palo Alto pays its teachers too much. What has changed? Despite
the dot-com bust, this area is still among the most expensive places to live,
and surging gasoline prices have impacted those who must commute in.
But this parcel tax goes much further than the tax it would replace. As shown
in a quite specific list of items it will fund, this proposed tax is no blank
check. It will restore some programs and positions that have fallen victim to
recent budget cuts, and it will sustain the smaller class sizes that were
achieved after a hard-fought effort over many years by parents and school
leaders. Last November, when a $521 parcel tax proposal fell a hairline shy of
winning two-thirds approval, supporters acknowledged they were overconfident,
and many people were preoccupied with the national election.
A defeat this time will not have such easy outs, and thus would be an
especially devastating blow to a district already harried by internal
budget-cutting demands and an uncertain state commitment to schools. The
devastation we believe would be far more than financial: A loss Tuesday would
shatter the morale of teachers, staff and supporters.
It would inevitably be interpreted as a sign that the century-plus era of
strong community support for the best-quality public schools in Palo Alto has
come to an end, that a core vision of the community has blurred.
That realization or belief, valid or not, would cause a loss of heart for all
involved. We believe it could accelerate a downward spiral that would alter our
schools for generations, perhaps forever.
It might even answer the current debate about whether or not there is a
"schools premium" in Palo Alto housing prices -- but is testing that proposition
worth the risk?
In our May 18 editorial supporting Measure A, we noted that many statistics
are floating around that seem to indicate the district is wasteful and pays
teachers too much. We are revisiting Measure A because it is so important -- and
after reading the campaign arguments and hearing from both sides, we are more
than ever convinced that significant playing with statistics is occurring.
Someone inclined to vote no can easily find a rationalization to do so. But
this is not just another school-funding election where a few protest votes won't
hurt much.
The vitally important aspect of this vote remains that without a new parcel
tax the district will be forced to cut directly and deeply into educational
programs and classrooms, well beyond the recent slashes into support services,
counselors and librarians.
Certainly Palo Alto schools would "survive" a defeat of Measure A next
Tuesday, as opponents assert, but they won't be the same schools afterward.
Again, vote yes on Measure A next Tuesday.
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/weekly/morgue/2005/2005_06_01.edit01tax2.shtml
