PLEASANTON -- Pleasanton school trustees have decided to back not one but two propositions that could bring millions of dollars to local schools.
In a 4-1 vote Tuesday evening, trustees agreed to endorse Proposition 30. The board also unanimously agreed to endorse Proposition 38 on the November ballot.
While trustees agreed neither proposition is the perfect solution to the serious lack of funds California schools face, they said passage of either would be a step in the right direction.
"What is important is that those who believe in education reform will push for local decisions to determine what can be done with the money we have," said trustee Jamie Hintzke. "With everything you hear about (education) reform, having local control is a huge piece."
Hintzke voted against supporting Prop. 30 due to her concern that the proposition could be politically manipulated.
Both propositions funnel funds to public schools. However, should Prop. 30 fail to pass, trigger cuts will be enacted.
Molly Munger, the woman behind Prop. 38, has said Brown's tax initiative is only a "Band-Aid" while Prop. 38 is "the whole rehabilitation."
"Parents and community members have been discouraged because they believe Sacramento is a place (where) they have very little influence," said Pleasanton PTA legislative chair Sandy Piderit. "Proposition 38 offers a longer term solution to education. It is a huge opportunity for us."
In the final moments before voting, trustee Jeff Bowser said the decision to support the propositions came down to the question of whether voters are pro-education.
"We have planned for (financial) devastation," he said. "We'll weather this upcoming storm. But subsequent years could be devastating (if neither proposition passes)."
Contact Katie Nelson at 925-847-2164 or follow her at Twitter.com/katienelson210.
Also known as "The Schools and Local Public Protection Act of 2012," Prop. 30 is designed to provide additional revenues to the state's general fund to avoid further cuts to public education. A new income tax would be heavily weighted towards highest earners, but the new sales tax increase that is part of the proposition would affect all taxpayers. The funding would also be part of the state's normal funding to schools, not additional funding. This initiative helps the state meet its commitments but in the near term does not provide additional funding for public education.
Also known as "Our Children, Our Future: Local Schools and Early Education Investment and Bond Debt Reduction Act," Prop. 38 is designed to provide a significant amount of funding directly to school sites and early childhood education. Passage of the proposition would trigger new, broad-based taxes, but higher earners pay more. The initiative is intended to provide supplemental funding to public education, meaning districts would get money faster than with Prop. 30.
Source: Pleasanton Unified School District