Letters to the editor

Measure C – Déjà vu all over again

Dear Editor:

Measure C will raise “local funds that will be spent only in the SRVUSD, to reduce class sizes, (and to) restore … essential programs.” Senior citizens may apply “for an exemption.” Expenditures will be reviewed “annually in an open, public hearing.” Measure C would restore “programs and services cut the last two years.”

Those were among tax-promoter pretenses during the San Ramon Valley Unified School District’s 1991 Measure C parcel-tax campaign (www.noonc.info). The 1991-92 district general-fund revenues provided $6,092 per student, in today’s dollars.

With California facing a massive politician-generated fiscal crisis then as now, 1991’s Measure C failed. But SRVUSD programs continued and revenues climbed rapidly anyway – at much faster rates than inflation and enrollment growth combined.

By 2003-04, before finally passing a parcel tax, SRVUSD was collecting $7,951 per student (again, constant dollars). This year, it’s $8221 – not just the $5,725 the Danville Weekly reported last week.

Promoting 2004’s parcel tax, district PR spokesman Terry Koehne proclaimed “an understanding there will not be a pay raise next year.” But 2005’s retroactive raise was just the first of four subsequent raises, atop existing step-and-column increases.

Now, says Koehne (April 24), “Since Proposition 13 passed, education funding in this state has declined.”

No, it hasn’t. California’s inflation-adjusted per-student funding is higher now, by 50 percent, than in 1978. And SRVUSD’s own per-student funding has jumped by a third just since 1991’s Measure C rejection.

Sensible 2009 Measure C voters will assure Election Office receipt of their No votes by next Tuesday!

Michael Arata

Danville