Thank You, Coronado Voters, for the Solid Defeat of the Prop E Property Tax Hike

Thank you, Coronado Voters, for the Solid Defeat of the Prop E Property Tax Hike

In yesterday’s primary election, Coronado voters brought about the solid defeat of the Prop E property tax hike. Around 60% of Coronado voters voted NO to yet another property tax hike. Thank you, Coronado voters!

Election Results

happy family on beach

Yesterday Coronado families brought about the solid defeat of the Prop E property tax hike.

On the San Diego Registrar of Voters website for election results, here is the official vote tally from the San Diego Registrar of Voters:

PROP E – CORONADO UNIFIED SCHOOL

$29M Bonds (Req 55%)

Precincts: 11
Counted: 11
Percentage: 100.0%

Votes:

NO – 3141  – 57.99%

YES – 2275 – 42.01%

CUSD’s Responsiblity

CUSD must publicly recognize the official results of Prop E because CUSD placed . . . really rushed . . . the divisive proposition onto the June primary ballot.

The CUSD superintendent and trustees must take notice of the results and accept their defeat publicly during a publicly noticed board meeting.

The CUSD trustees must vote to adopt the official result in an official resolution to be signed by the trustee board president and superintendent. This process should be in a video and in the minutes of a CUSD board meeting soon.

What This Means

The defeat of Prop E sends the message to CUSD that Coronado residents expect CUSD trustees and administrators to get their financial house in order, cut out their notorious wasteful spending, and live within their enviably ample means.

The U-T failed to fact-check it's way into discovery of the real reason for Prop E. Prop E is a sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme.

The next step for CUSD is to execute a reasonable contract with the YMCA for the successful management of the School Pool in order to stop the hemorrhaging of our tax dollars on the School Pool boondoggle.

The defeat of Prop E means that Coronado won’t allow CUSD to force us to pay principal and interest on new school bond debts for  CUSD’s old School Pool boondoggle debts. Coronado voters didn’t fall for CUSD’s sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme through Prop E.

The defeat of Prop E means that Coronado is fed up with CUSD’s continuing efforts to chip chip chip away at our Proposition 13 constitutional protection against unreasonable property tax hikes by trying to extract additional property tax dollars from us to pay off additional school bond debts. We are still paying off CUSD’s old . . . and recently re-financed . . . Prop KK school bond debts in principal and interest as you can see on your property tax bills . . . along with the Southwestern Community College bond debts that we are still paying off as you can see on your property tax bill, too.

That’s two property tax hikes over and above our Proposition 13 guaranteed limit of annual 1% property tax increases. It will be decades before Coronado taxpayers are finished paying off those two enormous school bond debts . . . for CUSD and for Southwestern Community College . . . through those two additional property tax hikes that appear on our property tax bills. Enough is enough!

What the Future Holds

happy family outside home

The defeat of Prop E means that Coronado families can hold on to their hard-earned money to support their families and secure their children’s and grandchildren’s futures.

The defeat of Prop E means that Coronado families can hold on to their hard-earned money to support their families and secure their children’s and grandchildren’s futures, instead of paying for yet another property tax hike through Prop E.

And it also means that one of two things will happen: Either CUSD will receive our message and find their guts required to get their financial house in order, cut out their notorious wasteful spending, and live within their enviably ample means . . . or CUSD will reject the will of Coronado voters, refuse to change their wasteful ways, and try again for another school bond or some other greedy grab for our hard-earned money.

Prediction

If CUSD tries another greedy grab for yet another property tax hike in the future, remember that you heard the prediction here first.

Keep your eyes and ears open. CUSD hired and paid for, with OUR tax dollars that they received, an expensive outside consultant firm named Clifford Moss, LLC.  The Clifford Moss consultants’ expensive services to extract property tax hikes for public school districts includes online advertising such as this:

spendthrift

Will CUSD make another greedy grab for yet another property tax hike after the solid defeat of Prop E? Only time will tell.

Local Ballot Measures. We provide Feasibility, Ballot Measure Preparation, and related Electoral (Advocacy) Campaign services. If your goal is a revenue measure on a local registered voter or property owner ballot, we know how to guide you through the process to make the right decisions and position your measure to win. Often, our work starts long before Election Day. Clifford Moss advocacy campaigns tend to be a natural extension of the ongoing public information work we do with our public sector clients.

Most unsettling for taxpayers is Clifford Moss named partner, Tom Clifford’s, blog entry on the company website:

How to Win a Tax Measure, Even After a Tough Loss

Ballot box losses are often a major blow to a school district and community. People work hard to pass a measure. When it doesn’t win they are often sad, defeated and sometimes angry.

These feelings are normal. But a loss doesn’t mean you should give up. A growing number of communities have been able to bounce back from defeat and win — many in a short period of time after the loss.

What is the trick? There is no one right answer. That said, a recent parcel tax win in Santa Clara – a 73% victory for Measure A and Santa Clara Unified Schools – offers some important clues . . .

Continue reading Tom Clifford’s blog for more of his disturbing advice on how school districts should ignore the will of voters and re-package, re-brand, and re-submit property tax hikes as school bonds or parcel tax measures by clicking here. It’s a real eye-opener into the world of public debt financing as it relates to public school districts in California.

happy children

CUSD should get its financial house in order so it can focus on putting the children first.

Hope For The Future

Our sincere hope is that CUSD will respect the will of Coronado voters and NOT try to re-package, re-brand, and re-submit yet another property tax hike after Coronado voters brought about the solid defeat of the Prop E property tax hike.

The facts show that with reasonable and necessary budget cuts . . . like we all must make in our lives if we are managing our finances well . . .  along with a reasonable contract executed between CUSD and the San Diego YMCA for the management of the School Pool to transform it from an infamous, failed boondoggle into a genuine, successful financial asset that respects surrounding neighbors . . . CUSD can get its finances back on track in order to focus on their only purpose for existing . . .  educating our children of San Diego County, including some of our children who live in Coronado.

We want our existing, ample, generous tax dollars to provide the best possible public school education FOR THE CHILDREN . . . not to be wasted on continued raises, bonuses, perks, travel, memberships, and more for the CUSD superintendent and administrators . . . and expensive outside consultants . . . and the School Pool boondoggle . . . and other wasteful spending.

Extended family in living room smiling

Thank you, Coronado voters, for your solid defeat of the Prop E property tax hike.

We hope that the CUSD leaders and administrators will rise to the challenge and PUT THE CHILDREN FIRST by living within their enviably ample means.

Thank you again, Coronado voters, for the solid defeat of the Prop E property tax hike.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles, Coronado Voters Defeated Prop E

Game Over: 7 Bombshells Obliterate CUSD’s Campaign for Yet Another Property Tax Hike, Vote NO on Prop E

Game Over: 7 Bombshells Obliterate CUSD’s Prop E Campaign for Yet Another Tax Hike

truth-lies-signCUSD chose to hang its entire campaign for the Prop E property tax hike on an untrue statement — that the “new” Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) “created” CUSD’s budget woes for which CUSD has no accountability for waste, overspending, or failing to live within its ample means of our local/state/federal tax dollars.

In other words, State = bad and CUSD = good. A very simplistic, and very false, dichotomy.

CUSD’s campaign lacks facts to support the property tax hike they seek . . . so their entire campaign is made up of the Bogeyman being the State aka Sacramento aka the Governor aka Jerry Brown aka the California Legislature aka California Legislators . . . and CUSD expects voters to believe that CUSD isn’t responsible in any way, shape, or form for its financial mismanagement, rampant overspending and gross waste.  CUSD’s entitlement culture imagines CUSD is exempt from the requirements to live within its ample means and to be careful stewards of Other People’s Money (OPM) aka our local/state/federal tax dollars.

the-sky-is-falling-2-chicken-littleCUSD falsely claims “The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Give us more of your money, money, money or else we’ll (insert assorted scare tactics and empty threats here)!”

CUSD’s empty threats and scare tactics consist of things like “If Prop E doesn’t pass, then we’ll cancel your daughter’s math class” or “cancel your son’s science class” or “lay off your child’s favorite teacher.” 

Such scare tactics and empty threats are the weapons of bullies . . . who are really cowards . . . and who are trying to dupe Coronado voters into voting AGAINST THE BEST INTERESTS of themselves, their families, their friends and their neighbors.

But 7 bombshells have obliterated CUSD’s greedy grab for an additional property tax hike from us.

Bombshell # 1

A CUSD trustee admitted that CUSD doesn’t need the Prop E school bonds!

shut up and take my money cartoonTo quote SDUSD teacher and Coronado resident Mark Gilliland in his letter, the CUSD trustee told him three times that Prop E is unnecessary:

  • We’ll be fine without it (the bond).”
  • “The bottom line is we don’t ’need’ (emphasized) the bond.”  
  • “We’ll be okay if it doesn’t pass.”

Read Mr. Gilliland’s seriously shocking letter by clicking here.

Bombshell  # 2

easy money rainCUSD’s 2013 audit proves CUSD total funding INCREASED $3.2 mil in 2013, yet CUSD lied and said their funding decreased!

Not surprisingly, CUSD failed to acknowledge this truth and thank us: CUSD received over $8 million MORE of OUR local property taxes in 2013! You’re welcome, CUSD.

And CUSD still failed to live within its means in 2013 and prior years. CUSD spent more of our tax dollars than it received in 2013 and prior years. How? By spending our tax dollars that CUSD holds in reserves.

Read the facts by clicking here.

Bombshell # 3

Your Ballot Pamphlet page PR-1301-1 bottom proves Prop E bonds will cost Coronado taxpayers and renters MUCH MORE than CUSD’s campaign promise claims!

The cost of Prop E to our Coronado community is MUCH HIGHER than CUSD claims in its campaign.

Read the facts by clicking here and here and here.

Bombshell # 4

wile e coyote and roadrunnerYour Ballot Pamphlet page PR-1301-3 is CUSD superintendent Jeff Felix’s extensive . . . and intentionally untitled . . . LEGAL DISCLAIMER in the CUSD Tax Rate Statement where the superintendent admits that CUSD could be wrong about its low cost estimates of the Prop E burden on Coronado taxpayers!

The cost of Prop E to our Coronado community is MUCH HIGHER than CUSD claims in its campaign propaganda.

Read the facts by clicking here.

The U-T failed to fact-check it's way into discovery of the real reason for Prop E. Prop E is a sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme.

The U-T failed to fact-check it’s way into discovery of the real reason for Prop E. Don’t make the same mistake. Prop E is a sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme.

Bombshell # 5

Your Ballot Pamphlet page PR-1301-10, eighth sentence up from the bottom, says Prop E is really a sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme!

Read the facts by clicking here, here, here and here.

Bombshell # 6

CUSD won’t open its books and BANK STATEMENTS for a forensic audit so voters can see the exact details of how CSUD wastes our local/state/federal tax dollars!

Read the facts by clicking here.

Bombshell # 7

santa gleeful with cashGovernor Jerry Brown guaranteed $10 Billion of ADDITIONAL State Aid for California schools in his revised 2014-2015 budget. CUSD doesn’t need Prop E!

The State is going to INCREASE State Aid to CUSD.

The State isn’t the Bogeyman.  The State isn’t the Villain.

The State is Santa Claus handing out cash to California schools during this election year.

Read the facts by clicking here.

Game Over, CUSD

game overThere are no facts to support the Prop E property tax hike.

CUSD chose to rush its Prop E property tax hike onto the June 3 Primary Election Ballot and to work hard to hide facts and spin, spin, spin their campaign out of emotional scare tactics, empty threats, a false Bogeyman (Sacramento) and personal attacks against NO voters who refuse to drink the CUSD Kool-Aid.

CUSD chose to inject negativity into our community with their divisive Prop E property tax hike.

It’s only right to vote NO on Prop E on June 3 and Kiss the Prop E School Bonds Goodbye.

Enough is enough!

No-on-Ev3-girl=phoneTo read the Top Ten Reasons to Vote NO on Prop E on June 3, click here.

Posted in Articles

Final Bombshell: Governor Guarantees $10 Billion INCREASE in State Aid for California Schools, The Sky Isn’t Falling, Vote NO on Prop E

Governor Guarantees $10 Billion INCREASE in State Aid to California Schools

As we’ve been saying all along, the sky isn’t falling.

A final bombshell obliterated CUSD’s Prop E campaign yesterday.

Coronado voters realized that incumbent Governor Jerry Brown revised the budget to INCREASE State Aid to California Schools by $10 BILLION!

santa gleeful with cashThis is an election year. The governor isn’t a villain. He’s Santa Claus who showers our schools with gifts of INCREASED State Aid . . .$10 billion worth.

This means CUSD will receive INCREASED State Aid under the new Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The LCFF isn’t the problem that CUSD wants Coronado voters to believe.

This also means CUSD’s claims of “the State” or “Sacramento” being “the villain” are wrong, wrong, wrong. The bogeyman State that CUSD wants voters to hate is going to help CUSD with INCREASED State Aid.

eCoronado Commenter Nails It

CUSD employees, pundits, supporters and spokes-bullies who troll the internet spin, spin, spinning to force the Prop E property tax hike on Coronado have doubled down on their silly spin in response to the good news from Sacramento.

children balloons celebrateBut a commenter with common sense on eCoronado nailed it yesterday.

jef on Mayor Casey Tanaka’s blog post “Community Voices: Yes on Prop E” 

. . . Maybe the question for the Mayor should be this: Will you withdraw your support for Prop E since the CA governor has GUARANTEED he will add an additional $10 billion to the LCFF plan to fund schools?

There are 1,043 school districts in California. That’s an average of $9.6million per school district. Where are the party balloons and hats in the Prop E office? Isn’t this GOOD news? Will the local media put this front and center for the citizens? Will the teachers “encourage” their students to go home and tell their parents that Prop E is no longer necessary to fund our schools?

Game Over, CUSD

game overYes, indeed, Jef.  We think all CUSD employees, pundits, and spokes-bullies should stop spin, spin, spinning to force the Prop E property tax hike on Coronado.

The entire campaign of CUSD hinges on one BIG LIE . . . that the LCFF caused CUSD’s budget woes so CUSD expects Coronado property owners and renters to bail out CUSD and throw even more money at CUSD. Prop E would enable CUSD trustees to avoid making the hard choices, cutting out the enormous amount of clearly documented waste, and living within their ample means. CUSD is like a spoiled teenager who maxed out all his credit cards and is now trying to dupe his parents (Coronado taxpayers) for yet another credit card to max out (Prop E bonds).

But CUSD’s BIG LIE  has been exposed in broad daylight and proven to be false . . .  the LCFF will INCREASE State Aid to CUSD thanks to the governor’s $10 Billion INCREASE in education funding in his revised budget.

As we’ve been saying, Prop E is unnecessary.

Game over.

Facts About Governor’s INCREASE in State Aid to Schools – Proposition 98 Resources

You may hear that the governor’s INCREASE in State Aid to schools takes the form of Proposition 98 resources.

What are Prop 98 resources?

From the Community College of San Francisco (CCSF) white paper on K-14 education funding:

happy-running-kids“Prop 98 establishes a minimum annual funding guarantee for kindergarten through community colleges or K-14 education. Over 40% of the State budget is spent on Proposition 98. And, about 75% of total K-14 funding comes from Proposition 98. Federal funds, special funds (such as lottery revenues), fee revenue (such as student enrollment fees), and non-Proposition 98 state General Fund dollars (which are largely dedicated to debt service on school facilities and costs for teacher retirement) make up the remainder. As stated above, Proposition 98 funds both K-12 and community colleges.”

To read more from the CCSF’s white paper, click here

California Legislative Analyst’s Office Says Revised State Budget “Significantly Increases Ongoing Program Support for Schools”

You will be bombarded by the campaign spin, spin, spinning of CUSD’s employees, pundits, and spokes-bullies trying to twist the good news of the revised State budget into bad news for poor little CUSD.

School children raising hands in a modern classroom.But here’s what the impartial analysis from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office says:

“We believe the Governor’s plan is a reasonable mix of one-time and ongoing spending–eliminating the largest outstanding one-time obligation and significantly increasing ongoing programmatic support for schools and community colleges.”

As Coronado voters, we choose to accept the facts from the State Legislative Analyst’s Office, not CUSD’s campaign spin on its Prop E campaign website and its CUSD school website.

To read more from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office, click here.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO because CUSD’s entire campaign hinged on a BIG LIE that’s been exposed and proven to be false.

Vote NO because the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) will INCREASE State Aid to CUSD.

Vote NO because Prop E is unnecessary.

No-on-Ev3-girl=phoneVote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles

CUSD’s Misleading Propaganda Doesn’t Admit that Prop E is a PROPERTY TAX HIKE, Vote NO on Prop E

CUSD’ Misleading Propaganda Doesn’t Admit that Prop E a Property Tax Hike

Say NO to Propety Tax IncreaseWe find CUSD to be . . . predictable . . .  because CUSD’s misleading propaganda never seems to refer to Prop E as what it is . . . yet another PROPERTY TAX HIKE.

CUSD’s campaign reminds us of a used car salesman trying to sell a loser lemon car to naive customers.

“It has low mileage . . . it was only driven by a little old lady to Church on Sundays.”

lemon car on lot“It’s in perfect condition . . . you won’t have to spend a dime to fix any problems.”

Blah, blah, blah.

They are both HARD SELLS . . . duping a naive customer into purchasing a lemon used car . . . and duping voters into agreeing to yet another PROPERTY TAX HIKE upon themselves and their neighbors and their family and their friends AGAINST THEIR BEST INTERESTS.

That’s why CUSD . . . like a used car salesman . . . isn’t being honest with voters.

CUSD’s Superintendent

In yesterday’s Union-Tribune article, CUSD superintendent Jeff Felix never calls Prop E a PROPERTY TAX HIKE . Instead he says:

man in suit secretly pocketing money bills“. . . if the (Prop E) measure passes, the funds will be used for blah, blah, blah . . .”

 ” . . . the funds generated by Prop E would blah, blah, blah . . .”

CUSD’s Board President

In yesterday’s Union-Tribune article, CUSD board president Dawn Ovrom imitates Jeff Felix by never calling Prop E a PROPERTY TAX HIKE:

“. . . the proposal would blah, blah, blah . . ,”

“. . . the measure is blah, blah, blah . . . “

CUSD’s Expensive Mailers

santa places presents under treeNaturally, CUSD’s expensive pro-tax hike mailers don’t call Prop E a PROPERTY TAX HIKE. Instead, it’s:

” . . . the increase is blah, blah, blah . . . “

An increase in what? Easter candy . . . July Fourth fireworks . . . Christmas presents?

No, Prop E is an INCREASE in YOUR PROPERTY TAXES . . . otherwise known as yet another PROPERTY TAX HIKE.

CUSD’s Campaign Website

In true misleading fashion, CUSD calls Prop E:

” . . . a solution is blah, blah, blah . . . “

” . . . local funding is blah, blah, blah . . . “

But CUSD doesn’t call Prop E what it is . . . yet another PROPERTY TAX HIKE.

CUSD’s School Website

who's pulling your strings bookAmong other misleading references, CUSD calls Prop E:

” . . . the proposal is blah, blah, blah . . . “

But CUSD doesn’t call Prop E what it is . . . yet another PROPERTY TAX HIKE.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO because you don’t believe CUSD’s spin.

Vote NO because you don’t believe CUSD’s propaganda.

Vote NO because you won’t be duped into voting AGAINST YOUR BEST INTERESTS by a greedy local school district that refuses to make the hard choices, cut out the documented waste in its budget, and live within its means.

No-on-Ev3-girl=phoneVote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles

Union-Tribune Quotes 2 NO on E Voters, But Allows CUSD to Lie & Regurgitate Worthless Campaign Promises Without Challenge, Vote NO on Prop E

facts magnifying glassUnion-Tribune Article Prints Some Truth About Prop E

Union-Tribune reporter Caroline Bidding’s article “Coronado Schools Seeking $29 Million Bond” in today’s paper quotes two NO on Prop E voters.

“I’m just convinced they (the district) not only don’t need our money, but they are wasting it when they do get it,” said longtime Coronado resident Jim Newhall.

“They are not being good stewards of our money. We have a lot of different examples of that.”

In records he has seen, Newhall questions the $4.1 million spent by the district over the past 27 months for professional consulting, a $241,000 price tag for pizza delivery, $3 million for computer leases and $1.7 million for computer service and repairs, among other expenses. He says he and other Coronado taxpayers have asked to see all the district’s financial statements, a request that has gone unheeded, he said.

“We can’t get any details,” said Jerry Toci, another longtime Coronado homeowner. “This is very frightening. “We don’t know how much they are actually borrowing. We have no idea of what it will cost to repay or how long, and we don’t know what the money is going to be used for.” 

Union-Tribune Prints Lots of Worthless Campaign Promises that CUSD Regurgitated, So We Do the Fact-Checking For You

The U-T failed to fact-check it's way into discovery of the real reason for Prop E. Prop E is a sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme.

The U-T failed to fact-check it’s way into discovery of the real reason for Prop E. Prop E is a sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme.

The U-T printed 14 categories of worthless campaign promises and other meaningless generalities from CSUD without fact-checking.

CUSD’s worthless words are in italics at the beginning of each of the 14 categories. Our fact-checking follows:

(1) “District officials say if the measure passes, the funds will be used on facilities, equipment and technology in the five-campus district that will help maintain manageable class sizes and prepare students for college and good-paying jobs in math, science and technology.” 

As noted in the San Diego County Taxpayers Association (SDCTPA) 13-page analysis of Prop E, CUSD failed to submit the COSTS for all of the items in the Project List . . . including any “facilities, equipment and technology” projects . . . even though CUSD is legally required to present ALL COSTS of ALL PROJECTS it lists in seeking Prop E school bonds . . . Yet CUSD merely provided costs for only two items:

  • School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme – CUSD submitted its costs for re-financing the Certificates of Participation (COPs) . . . called “lease agreements” . . .  that CUSD took out to finance the School Pool boondoggle WITHOUT voter approval . . . which VIOLATES the prior false campaign promise CUSD made to our community that Coronado taxpayers would NEVER be responsible for the School Pool because CUSD would pay to construct, maintain and run it . . . and CUSD would do such a good job of running the School Pool that CUSD would make a PROFIT from the School Pool . . . ha ha ha! . . . and CUSD’s plans to use NEW Prop E General Obligation Bond (GO Bonds) debts to re-finance OLD School Pool boondoggle debts (the COPs) is a dangerous precedent and further evidence of CUSD’s continuing financial mismanagement.
  • Maintenance costs for buildings, e.g. painting buildings, additional signage, etc. . . . which are OPERATING COSTS . . . that should NEVER be paid with Prop E school bonds because it’s a slippery slope of continuing financial mismanagement . . . Prop E are General Obligation Bonds (GO Bonds) which are intended for one-time, major, capital costs like CONSTRUCTION of dilapidated school buildings. All of CUSD’s buildings are NEW . . .  and were paid for with OUR tax dollars but WITHOUT OUR VOTER APPROVAL under the Redevelopment scheme that the State shut down on February 1, 2012.

spendthrift(2) Coronado Superintendent Jeffrey Felix said the funds generated by Proposition E would protect the high quality of education in area schools that are now a “casualty” of the state’s Local Control Funding Formula, or LCFF. 

Affluent Coronado’s property taxes are so high thanks to our beautiful beach location location location, that CUSD received an approximately $8 million INCREASE in our total local property taxes as well as a $3.2 million INCREASE in total funding in 2013.

And a world-famous Think Tank has already proven that throwing more money at schools in California DOESN’T improve student performance or achievement. Read World Famous Think Tank Proves Prop E Won’t Help Student Performance, Vote NO on Prop E.

So, NO, Prop E won’t “protect the high quality of education” at CUSD. But Prop E will keep administrators like Felix getting his 20% raises rubber-stamped by the CUSD board as is the recent, undeniable fact.

And, NO, the State’s new Local Control Funding Formula isn’t the “villain” that “caused” CUSD’s budget woes. CUSD caused its financial woes by wasting, overspending, and failing to live within its means. Read Fact: New State Grant Formula Doesn’t Take Money Away from CUSD, Vote NO on Prop E.

And, NO, superintendent Jeff . . . it’s highly inappropriate . . . especially in our military town with so many military families who are an integral part of our community . . . to use the term “casualty” when referring to Other People’s Money (OPM, or OUR tax dollars) . . .  that you are whining about “losing” to needy school districts. Our United States military personnel have lost life and limb for our freedom  .  . . and for your right to whine about “losing” State Aid when CUSD actually received a $3.2 million INCREASE in funding in 2013 according to CUSD’s own audit. Read CUSD Received $3.2 Million INCREASED Funding in 2013, CUSD Lied About Decreased Funding, Vote NO on Prop E.

(3) Under that new method of distributing state education money, revenue Coronado counted on to restore the district to pre-California budget crisis funding levels has been diverted to school districts with large populations of English learners, students from low socio-economic families and foster children, Felix said. money bills stacks

CUSD shouldn’t “count on” State Aid because CUSD is an affluent school district without many needy students.

CUSD must live within its ample means and rely on OUR already hefty Coronado property taxes that we already pay . . . instead of whining that the State is looking after needier children . . . and instead of demanding yet another property tax hike from us through Prop E.

Enough is enough!

(4) Felix said he has no problem with a student-weighted funding formula, but the timing of it “at the tail end of a five-year recession” couldn’t be worse for districts such as his. Coronado doesn’t qualify for supplemental grant money within LCFF. “We understand the needs of these children, but we lament that the state has chosen to fund their needs on the backs of Coronado’s deserving kids,” Felix wrote in a news release announcing the bond proposal. “Without approval of this measure, our award-winning neighborhood schools will be decimated.”

boy in hundred dollar bill costume

CUSD superintendent Felix certainly has told our community that he has a problem with the new “student weighted funding formula.”

He, other administrators, cronies and naive Prop E supporters have been regurgitating the meme of “unfairness” of San Diego Unified School District (SDUSD) receiving more State Aid than CUSD . . . which is CUSD’s unfair and unrealistic comparison.

SDUSD has more English Learners (ELs) than CUSD. SDUSD has students from more than 15 ethnic groups who speak more than 60 different languages and dialects. So under the new Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) SDUSD will receive State Aid to help those high-needs students stay in school and move on to college and careers. Also under the new LCFF, SDUSD will receive more oversight grants because it has more than 132,000 students on 226 campuses . . . In contrast, CUSD has only around 2,800 students in 5 small schools. So CUSD doesn’t need oversight grants like SDUSD does to oversee its LCAPs. Read Fact: State Grant Formula Doesn’t Take Money Away from CUSD, Vote NO on Prop E.

CUSD has been whining about CUSD being “second to last on the list” for State Aid . . . which is OUR tax dollars doled out by Sacramento in various ways to SUPPLEMENT CUSD’s more-than-generous share of our hefty Coronado property taxes . . . since the CUSD board voted in February to rush Prop E onto the June 3 Primary Election Ballot.

Shame on CUSD superintendent for changing his story when speaking to the U-T reporter. A little bit of fact-checking at the U-T would have easily revealed the superintendent’s duplicity.

drama queenIt’s also important to note that melodramatics are a giant red flag that CUSD is trying to hoodwink naive voters into voting AGAINST THEIR BEST INTERESTS. CUSD superintendent Felix’s melodrama is . . . inappropriate . . . He says CUSD “laments” the change in State Aid grants . . . which is a term usually reserved for mourning the loss of life . . . not the loss of Other People’s Money (OPM) otherwise known as OUR tax dollars which is State Aid . . . He also uses a cheap scare tactic by falsely claiming that CUSD will be “decimated” without Prop E . . . which again is a term usually reserved for describing the loss of life . . . not OPM . . . and Felix provides no concrete proof because CUSD won’t be “decimated” . . . When Prop E fails, CUSD will simply cut waste from its budget . . . including future raises to superintendent Felix’s already too high compensation package after his recent 20% raise . . . and then CUSD can sit back and expect more and more INCREASES in its funding from the natural growth rate of our property taxes . . . just like CUSD received a $3.2 million INCREASE in funding in 2013 according to CUSD’s auditor. Prop E is yet another unnecessary tax hike.

crossed fingers behind man's back(5) Some Coronado homeowners aren’t buying it. And they certainly don’t want to be taxed for it at $40 per $100,000 assessed value of their homes.

The proposed Prop E property tax hike is going to cost Coronado homeowners . . . AND RENTERS . . . far more than CUSD’s worthless campaign promise of “$40 per $100,000 of assessed property value” printed incorrectly as fact in this U-T article.

Read Top 10 Reasons to Vote NO on Prop E for the explanation of how RISKY are the costs of the proposed Prop E school bonds.

(6) Over the past five years, the Coronado school district has maintained a balanced budget through larger class sizes, budget cuts, one-time federal grants taxpayer with taxes on back in sackand dipping into reserves, Felix said. The 3,200-student district’s operating budget is about $28 million for the current academic year and $28 million for next year.

CUSD has failed to balance its budget because . . . just like the city . . . CUSD has hidden its enormous off-balance-sheet Pension Debts and Redevelopment Debts from Coronado taxpayers . . . to the tune of MORE THAN $200 million! Read $200+ Million is CUSD’s Current Debt, Vote NO on Prop E.

Also, if the U-T had done a bit of fact-checking, they would have found CUSD parents who are agitating for the Prop E tax hike because they want their children to remain in “classes with under 20 students.” Does the superintendent mean to suggest that CUSD classes with “less than 20 students” is CUSD’s way of “maintaining large class sizes”? Someone may need a refresher course in basic mathematics.

(7)  A 55 percent vote is required to pass the general-obligation bond. As of March 2, there were 10,554 registered voters in the city of Coronado, according to the San Diego County Registrar of Voters.

Crooks know that registering new voters . . . even when they don’t reside in the district . . . is a way to cheat to win. We sincerely hope that’s not what CUSD has been doing.

man in suit secretly pocketing money billsCertainly we’ve seen black and white evidence of Coronado High School Principal Jenny Moore urging students to tell their friends to register to vote for Prop E in the school newsletter . . . a CUSD resource that is legally banned from promoting Prop E under the California Education Code . . . which is State law.

We’ve also heard from concerned CUSD parents that Coronado Mayor Casey Tanaka . . . who also is a Coronado high school teacher with a conflict of interest . . . has emailed his former students who live out-of-state . . . to urge them to register to vote for Prop E . . . which email addresses could be another CUSD resource that is legally banned from use in promoting Prop E . . . in violation of the California Education Code . . . which is State law.

Does CUSD imagine that it is entitled and above the law? We sincerely hope not.

We aren’t surprised that the record of Coronado registered voters surged to 10,554 from 10,228 . . . an increase of 326 voters!

We sincerely hope that CUSD isn’t engaging in a type of voter fraud in this way. If true, CUSD would be setting a terrible example for its students to cheat to win due to CUSD greed for another $29 million of OUR property tax dollars . . . that will cost Coronado property taxpayers and renters around $60 million to $90 million (double or triple $29 million face value of the school bonds) when you consider that Coronado property owners would have to pay back principal PLUS interest on the $29 million face value of the proposed Prop E school bonds.

(8) In November, True North Research conducted a telephone poll of more than 400 likely Coronado voters. It revealed that 69 percent were amenable to a $90 million bond to help generate money for district schools.

carpetbagger and scalawagTrue North is merely an expensive tool that also tried . . . but failed . . . to get a risky, wasteful, unaffordable school bond passed in Del Mar in 2012 . . . just like Prop E is risky, wasteful, unaffordable for Coronado taxpayers.

Also in Del Mar in 2012 . . . Piper Jaffray bond underwriters were involved . . . they stood to make millions of dollars off the backs of Del Mar property taxpayers and renters . . . but Del Mar voters were too smart . . . and they defeated the Del Mar school bond in 2012. Read Del Mar Voters Defeated School Bond in 2013, Vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Both True North and Piper Jaffray were involved in the unsuccessful 2012 Del Mar school bond that Del Mar voters defeated. And both True North and Piper Jaffray are involved in CUSD’s Prop E. Do you see the pattern of outside carpet baggers being invited into Coronado by CUSD in order to try to fleece Coronado taxpayers into another property tax hike?

If you know how school bonds work, you know that the TRUE AND ACTUAL COST to property taxpayers is usually double or triple the face value of the bonds.

The face value of Prop E bonds is $29 million. Triple that amount is around $90 million. The true and actual cost of Prop E to Coronado taxpayers can be around $90 million.

del mar ca beachHow would Prop E work? CUSD would get it’s $29 million face value of the school bonds and run with it . . . to waste our tax dollars as evidence shows they have wasted in the past  . . . And bondholders, bond buyers, bond investors would make a generous return on their investments (ROI) . . . And Coronado property taxpayers and renters would be left with the burden of paying the principal and interest on the bonds so that the investors get their ROI.

Now do you see that CUSD’s Prop E campaign promises are worthless . . . and CUSD isn’t obligated to issue three series of “low cost” or “short duration” school bonds?

Simple fact-checking proves that Prop E would allow CUSD to obligate US Coronado taxpayers and renters to pay up to $90 million for CUSD’s use of $29 million of OUR property tax dollars in the form of yet another property tax hike called Prop E.

(9) Typically, school bonds are designed to pay for big projects with a long life expectancy, such as a new school or stadium, and they can take decades to mature.

Coronado says it wants to take a different tack that includes:

facts falsehood myths deceits• Individual bonds issued with terms less than 5 years to reduce costs.

• The total value of all bonds issued not to exceed $29 million. District leaders have determined this amount will cover the anticipated funding problem over the next 10 years, and not beyond.

• Not issuing new bonds if they will cause total annual payments to exceed $3.3 million.

• Paying off all bonds by Sept. 30, 2024 so as not to burden future generations.

CUSD may trick the public into believing that CUSD may “want to take a different tack” . . . but CUSD isn’t obligated to do so with Prop E school bonds.

Every item in this # 9 item is a worthless campaign promise that CUSD isn’t obligated to keep.

fool and his money are soon partedThe key to the COST of Prop E for Coronado taxpayers is the BOND INTEREST RATES. CUSD doesn’t control the bond market . . . CUSD doesn’t control the bond interest rates . . . CUSD is merely trying to dupe 55% of Coronado voters into pulling the trigger to enable CUSD to go into the bond market to issue three series of bonds to raise $29 million to support CUSD’s tax dollar waste and financial mismanagement addictions . . . with timing that is within the sole discretion of CUSD . . . and CUSD can obligate Coronado taxpayers and renters . . .  to pay up to $90 million for up to 40 years!

Don’t believe what you just read?

Then read your BALLOT PAMPHLET materials. The County Counsel’s Independent Analysis on pages PR-1301-1 to 2 of your BALLOT PAMPHLET . . . says in black and white that CUSD can obligate US with UP TO 12% interest to pay back along with principal on the Prop E bonds! That means the Prop E bonds can be very expensive and Coronado taxpayers can be obligated to pay it off for many years!

The CUSD superintendent’s own signed . . . extensive . . . but sneakily unidentified and untitled  . . .  CUSD’s LEGAL DISCLAIMER on page PR-1301-3 of your BALLOT PAMPHLET . . . says in black and white that CUSD could be wrong about all of the above worthless campaign promises that the U-T printed incorrectly as fact . . . and there’s not a darn thing Coronado taxpayers can do to hold CUSD to its campaign promises. Voters beware!

(10) Bond proceeds would be used to fund renovation of existing classrooms and other school facilities and free up the district’s general fund by paying or prepaying lease-purchase obligations.

breaking the law tapeAgain, here are more of CUSD’s worthless campaign promises that the U-T printed without challenge or follow up questions.

Most important . . . the U-T reporter failed to print the fact that “freeing up general funds” is an ILLEGAL USE of Prop E bond money . . which would really be OUR property tax hike dollars . . . so CUSD should be condemned for its plans to use Prop E bond proceeds illegally.

The U-T failed to fact-check it's way into discovery of the real reason for Prop E. Prop E is a sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme.

The U-T failed to fact-check it’s way into discovery of the real reason for Prop E. Prop E is a sneaky School Pool boondoggle re-finance scheme.

Also very important is the fact that “paying or prepaying lease-purchase obligations” is the CUSD superintendent’s admission, clear as mud, that CUSD intends to use the proposed Prop E capital improvement bonds to pay off the School Pool boondoggle debts also known as “lease-purcahse obligations” . . . a.k.a. the 2005 Certificates of Participation, or COPs . . . a.k.a. the secret debts, despised by all California government watchdogs, that CUSD issued WITHOUT VOTER APPROVAL in 2005. A bit of fact-checking by the U-T would have clarified for U-T readers that CUSD intends to pay off the old School Pool boondoggle debts (COPs) with the proposed new Prop E school bond debts.

It’s wrong to pay off old debts with new debts. Too bad the U-T failed to connect the dots between “lease-purchase obligations” and School Pool boondoggle. It wouldn’t have taken much effort for the U-T to connect those dots.

(11) No bond money would be used for administrative salaries.

wrong logoThis is another one of CUSD’s worthless campaign promises.

Since CUSD wastes OUR tax dollars in its General Fund on administrators’ compensation . . . and CUSD said Prop E is meant to “free up general funds” for other uses . . . obviously administrators’ salaries are other uses.

So Prop E can INDIRECTLY benefit administrators at the expense of the children.

An obvious question that the U-T failed to ask CUSD is . . .Will Prop E be used for the DIRECT benefit of administrative bonuses or other administrative forms of  non-salary compensation . . . like travel . . . memberships . . . meals . . . mileage . . . cell phones . . .  laptops . . . more?

(12)  Board President Dawn Ovrom said the proposal is a creative solution to a crisis that is real.

the-sky-is-falling-2-chicken-littleNothing in Prop E is “creative” . . . it’s mandatory  . . . for all school bonds that California school districts attempt after the year 2000  . . . which is the year Proposition 39 LOWERED the number of voters required to approved school bond debts from 66.6% to 55% to make it EASIER for California school districts to indebt us property taxpayers. . . the fake Oversight Committee that will be stuffed with CUSD cronies at CUSD’s discretion . . . the Project List that is CUSD’s loooong Wish List with everything thrown in but the kitchen sink . . . and in violation of the Proposition 39 law, CUSD failed to provide COSTS for every item on its loooong Wish List (Project List).

A truly creative solution for CUSD would be to make the hard choices . . . cut its waste out of its budgets . . . stop whining about State Aid . . . recognize CUSD is in an affluent neighborhood that already supplies abundant property taxes to CUSD . . . and live within CUSD’s ample means. That would impress us.

Hey, CUSD, if you have to keep saying your self-declared “financial crisis” is “real” . . . it’ NOT.

CUSD’s “financial crisis” . . . is actually fake . . . manufactured . . . self-created . . . It’s just another Big Lie that CUSD repeats over and over and over and over again hoping to wear down voters into believing it. Experience proves that if you say a Big Lie loud enough and long enough . . . eventually the public will believe it.

Hey, CUSD, do you know what would convince us you have a “real” financial crisis? Open up your books . . . release your BANK STATEMENTS . . . and let’s have a real, independent, forensic audit to see exactly what you’re doing with OUR tax dollars. What are you afraid of?  The truth?

(13) “We cannot cut our way out of this without decimating the quality of our education,” she said. “This measure includes innovative taxpayer protections that make it arguably the most prudent of its kind anywhere in California.”

Ha ha ha! How amusing. And how very melodramatic.

Scam alert cap and diplomaThere are ABSOLUTELY NO “innovative” taxpayer protections . . . the fake Oversight Committee stuffed with CUSD cronies who will rubber-stamp CUSD’s overspending, waste and financial mismanagement of Prop E bond proceeds . . . and CUSD’s loooong Wish List/Project List with everything thrown in except the kitchen sink . . . both are MANDATED by law to be included in Prop E. The other parts of Prop E . . . the three bond issues . . . at low cost . . . for short duration . . . with no more than X amount of bonds outstanding . . . blah, blah, blah . . . are worthless campaign promises that CUSD isn’t obligated to keep.

(14) Felix said the bond’s taxpayer protections should please the community. Also appealing, he said, is the fact the state could not touch the bond proceeds and it requires an independent citizen’s oversight committee. “That seems to hit a good nerve for Coronado,” he said.

wrong logoWrong, wrong, wrong again. Simple fact-checking by the U-T would prove that the fake Oversight Committee stuffed with CUSD cronies who will rubber-stamp whatever wasteful spending CUSD wants to do with the potential Prop E money . . .  hits a VERY BAD NERVE with every non-CUSD employee, non-CUSD crony and non-naive CUSD supporter who didn’t drink the Kool Aid and who refuse to believe everything CUSD says without proof.

Prop E is very unappealing to Coronado property taxpayers who understand how Prop E will work. Prop E displeases voters in our community who don’t swallow CUSD’s campaign promises and believe everything CUSD tells voters to believe.

Remember, in San Diego the Oversight Committee . . .  failed to be a “unique taxpayer protection” . . . and rubber-stamped the school district’s spending that was ILLEGAL . . . and then San Diego taxpayers had to bear the cost of a LAWSUIT against the district to stop the spending of bond funds on something that was outside the Project List . . . that was also supposed to be a “unique taxpayer protection” . . . so it’s already been proven by our immediate next-door neighboring school district that there are no real “taxpayer protections” in school bonds.

dilbert impractical plan

“Several mediocre minds concocted an impractical plan.”

The only taxpayer protection against CUSD’s overspending, waste and financial mismanagement is for Coronado voters to refuse to give CUSD yet another credit card to max out for $29 worth of school bonds without accountability on the part of CUSD.

The only real taxpayer protection is to vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

No-on-Ev3-girl=phoneCoronado voters, don’t choose to allow yourselves to be fooled . . . a second time . . . by CUSD. Remember the School Pool boondoggle.

Make CUSD cut waste and live within its ample means.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Read the rest of the Union-Tribune article by clicking here.

 

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles

Judge Ended Lawsuit Against CUSD on a Technicality, Vote NO on Prop E

confusingJudge Believes CUSD Doesn’t Have Bank Statements

Yep.  The Judge bought CUSD’s claim that CUSD doesn’t have bank statements.

In no way does the Judge’s decision “exonerate” CUSD . . . as the superintendent melodramatically trumpeted on eCoronado today. CUSD is still responsible for its books and BANK STATEMENTS . . . CUSD can’t hide behind the skirts of the County Department of Education (DOE) who merely oversees CUSD and reports to the State what CUSD reports to the County DOE.

In no way was well-funded, affluent, bully CUSD a poor little victim who was made to “endure harassment” by one woman representing many Coronado taxpayers in a lawsuit who demand CUSD open it books for public inspection including the BANK STATEMENTS . . . so the public can see where CUSD is really spending OUR money . . . as the CUSD superintendent melodramatically whined on eCoronado today.

David vs goliathThe Real Victims

CUSD is a big, old bully trying to ram yet another property tax hike down Coronado taxpayers’ throats with Prop E.

Cronies, employees, outside contractors and others have donated around $45,000 so far to CUSD’s Prop E campaign! That’s a lot of dough!

Clearly greed for the $29 million that hangs in the balance makes cronies and others support Prop E.

Elections can be purchased in Coronado just as in any other locale.

Some supporters are simply too naive to Extended family in living room smilingquestion CUSD’s worthless campaign promises about Prop E.

CUSD receives obscene amounts of OUR tax dollars just for existing . . . and CUSD still refuses to live within its means.

Who are the real victims of CUSD’s financial mismanagement and tax dollar waste?

  • The children, and
  • Coronado taxpayers.

“Presumption of Credibility”?

pool-lap-swimmersThe Judge said that a legal case says that school districts have a “presumption of credibility” so his decision is bound by that precedent.

But we all know CUSD isn’t credible.

We’ve documented the long list of CUSD’s lies, misleading statements, worthless campaign promises:

  1. CUSD promised our community it would construct, maintain and run the School Pool at a PROFIT and lied because CUSD spent the last 8 years running the School Pool finances into the ground
  2. CUSD promised Coronado taxpayers we would NEVER be have to pay for the School Pool and lied because Prop E is a sneaky School Pool refinance scheme
  3. CUSD supplied COST estimates to San Diego County Taxpayers Association (SDCTPA) for the Prop E sneaky School Pool re-finance scheme, and for building maintenance . . . both which should NEVER be paid for by Prop E General Obligation Bonds (GO Bonds)
  4. CUSD failed to supple COST estimates for anything else on its loooong Wish List of a Project List in your BALLOT PAMPHLET  . . .  according to SDCTPA . . . which is one of many reasons why SDCTPA failed to recommend Prop E to Coronado taxpayers. Read 15 Serious Problems with Prop E, Vote NO on Prop E.
  5. CUSD states in the Project List it submitted in your BALLOT PAMPHLET on page PR-1301-10 in the eighth sentence up from the bottom of the page . . .  that if Prop E passes, CUSD will spend the Prop E bond money on re-financing the School Pool boondoggle . . . sneakily called “lease obligations” by CUSD. Read Top 10 Reasons to Vote NO on Prop E.
  6. CUSD claims that “the State” or “Sacramento” is “the villain” who “took away” State Aid (more of OUR tax dollars) with a “new Local Control Funding Formula” which caused CUSD’s “financial crisis” and the “decimation of CUSD’s budget” . . . but in reality CUSD’s total funding INCREASED by $3.2 million in 2013. Read CUSD Received $3.2 Million INCREASE in Funding in 2013, CUSD Lied About Decreased Funding, Vote NO on Prop E.
  7. the-sky-is-falling-2-chicken-littleCUSD board president Dawn Ovrom claims CUSD “can’t cut its way out” of its “budget crisis” that was “created by the State, not the CUSD board” . . . but Coronado taxpayers found that in the limited 27 months of purchase warrants that CUSD disclosed on its website obscene evidence that proves gross waste of OUR tax dollars . . . CUSD’s wasteful spending includes, but isn’t limited to: School Pool ($722,000.00), Outside Consultants ($4.1 million), Technology ($2.9 million), Outside Contractors Service & Repairs ($1.7 million),Travel/Conferences ($287,000.00), Dues/Memberships ($112,000.00), and more. CUSD has merely provided CUSD’s self-created Purchase Order Reports . . . not CUSD’s actual BANK STATEMENTS . . .  from July 2011 to November 2013 hereRead Top 10 Reasons to Vote NO on Prop E.
  8. CUSD claims that it’s careful with how it spends OUR tax dollars so it deserves at least $29 million MORE of OUR property tax dollars through the Prop E property tax hike . . . but CUSD’s own auditor found in 2013 that CUSD was guilty of 21 major problems with its books!  . . . The auditor found major problems with CUSD’s . . . financial statements reporting . . . state aid award reporting . . . payroll over budget . . . no internal controls to live within budget . . . cash receipts . . . BANK STATEMENTS . . . School Pool (BBMAC) director . . . Child Care director . . . credit card fraud & abuse . . . expenditure approvals . . . receipts evidence . . . BANK DEPOSIT RECONCILIATION . . . revenue potentials for major fundraiser & events . . . attendance record-keeping . . . teacher-reported rosters on attendance . . . overstated average daily attendance (ADA) . . . and more. Read 21 Major Problems Auditor Found With CUSD’s Books, Vote NO on Prop E.
  9. CUSD has misled our community with many more lies, so we invite you to read Top 10 Reasons to Vote NO on Prop E for further proof that CUSD isn’t credible.

 Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO on Prop E because you don’t believe CUSD should be “presumed credible” since they have spent decades lying to our community.

No-on-Ev3-girl=phoneVote NO on Prop E because you want CUSD to comply with the Public Information Act and supply its BANK STATEMENTS.

Vote NO on Prop E because you think CUSD should open its books to Coronado taxpayers before CUSD demands another $29 million of OUR property tax dollars through the Prop E tax hike.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3!

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles, Lawsuit Against CUSD, School Pool Boondoggle

Prop E Supporters Are Wrong Again About Cost & Duration of the Bonds, Read Your BALLOT PAMPHLET, Vote NO on Prop E

children readingDuration of School Bonds is Legally Up To 40 Years at Cost of Up To 12% Interest Rates

You will read in your Ballot Pamphlet on page PR-1301-1, last paragraph, that the County Counsel’s Impartial Analysis tells us these irrefutable facts: The interest rate on any bond, which is established at the time of bond issuance, could not exceed 12% per annum. The final date of any bond could be no later than 25 years or 40 years after the date the bonds were issued as determined by the District.

Impartial Translation for Voters

fool and his money are soon partedHere’s what the County Counsel’s Impartial Analysis means for Coronado voters:

The interest rate on any bond, which (interest rate) is established at the time of bond issuance (by the actual bond market, not by CUSD’s superintendent or on the CUSD campaign website or in CUSD’s slick mailer advertisements or in the minds of Prop E pundits) could not exceed 12% (which is WAY higher than CUSD’s campaign promise of less than 1%!) per annum (year). The final maturity date (duration) of any bond could be no later than 25 years or 40 years after the date the bonds are issued as determined by the District (Watch out! That means CUSD has sole discretion and can “roll over” or re-finance Prop E bonds up to 40 years like CUSD re-financed in 2012 CUSD’s 1998 Prop KK bonds that we are still paying principal and interest on! Read your property tax bill line item tax hike for “Unified School” which is your 1998 CUSD Prop KK bonds tax hike that CUSD re-financed in 2012. You’re going to be paying off CUSD’s 1998 Prop KK bond debts for at least another decade).

The reason you have the County Counsel’s Impartial Analysis on the first and second pages of your Ballot Pamphlet materials for Prop E is precisely because it’s common knowledge that CUSD can’t be trusted to tell you the truth about Prop E.

Prop E Supporters Are Wrong Again

wrong logoHere’s some of the fiction that Prop E supporters are writing over on Coronado.Patch.com . . . while they’re also busy harassing and attacking one of the few people who understands the complex details of how CUSD is cooking its books:

Kathleen May 12, 2014 at 04:11 PM

You are once again incorrect Ms. Uremovic. Jerry Brown signed in to law in October a bill limiting the term on school bonds to 25 years or less. Prop E CUSD bonds would be for 10 years and 10 years only. I’m curious, exactly who would be conducting your forensic audit of CUSD?

Where Do They Come Up With Their Silly Statements?

Prop E supporters believe the campaign promises they read . . . on CUSD’s campaign website . . . in CUSD’s expensive and slick campaign mailer advertisements . . . from CUSD’s superintendent and other fast-talking CUSD employees . . . from lobbyist handshake over moneyself-interested CUSD cronies . . .  from CUDS’s assorted spokes-bullies and pundits.

Sadly, Prop E supporters are making the foolish choice to rely on CUSD’s campaign promises that aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.

Why any Coronado voter would choose to rely on campaign promises from CUSD . . . knowing full well that CUSD lied to our community about the School Pool . . . and created the School Pool boondoggle . . . remains a mystery to us.

Ballot Pamphlet Materials vs. Campaign Promises

The Ballot Pamphlet materials are what voters are being asked to vote on.

Nothing. Else. Matters.

None of the campaign promises from . . .  fast-talking CUSD employees . . . self-interested  CUSD cronies . . . and naive Prop E supporters . . . mean anything.

The bond market is completely out of CUSD’s control. They’re presenting the illusion of certainty about Prop E bond debts where . . . in reality . . . there is no certainty.

Why? To hoodwink you into voting for the Prop E property tax hike . . . which is a hard sell. pool-lap-swimmers

The facts support a NO vote on Prop E  . . . so the pro-Prop E tax hike campaign is using scare tactics, empty threats, melodramatic over-exaggerations, scapegoating of the “villain” Sacramento (the State, the Governor, etc.)  . . . bullying teachers and parents into propagandizing about the “need” for unnecessary Prop E . . . harassing, ostracizing and personally attacking NO voters who aren’t buying what they’re selling.

CUSD’s pro-Prop E tax hike campaign is all very ugly and all very predictable. We’ve seen it before in Coronado over and over and over again.

These are your real neighbors behaving true to their authentic nature. Remember well CUSD’s Prop E campaign to raise your property taxes. Don’t ever forget it.

CUSD has promised voters the moon  . . . and other fairy tales . . . a “low cost,” “short duration,” “right-sized,” GIANT pile of debt for you to pay and for CUSD to waste . . . even after they received a $3.2 million INCREASE in total funding in 2013!

cow jumped over the moonForget CUSD’s rosy campaign promises of short bond durations and low bond costs. Prop E isn’t “right-sized” at all. It’s just another credit card for CUSD to max out before they come back for another tax hike.

Recognize the reality that Prop E is too risky and too expensive. Read our prior article Pool Pool Pool, Prop E is a Sneaky School Pool Boondoggle Re-Finance Scheme by clicking here.

Voters should remember this “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me” . . . and voters should refuse to be fooled twice by CUSD. Vote NO on Prop E.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO because you aren’t fooled by CUSD’s campaign promises about Prop E.

Vote NO because you refuse the high risk and high expense of Prop E. No-on-Ev3-girl=phone

Vote NO because it’s the only way to force CUSD to live within its means and stop wasting our tax dollars.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3!

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles, Silly Pro-Prop E Campaign Promises

Bond Purchases of iPads Can Continue, Vote NO on Prop E

Tech Companies’ Lobbyists Earned Their Corporate Lobbying Fees in Sacramento

Bond purchases of iPads can continue

Bill to rein in the practice failed in committee

By Ashly McGlone 2:30 P.M. MAY 10, 2014  San Diego Union-Tribune

laptopA bill that would have barred school districts from using voter-approved facility bond funds to purchase take-home iPads and other computer devices for students died in the state Assembly’s Education Committee last week.

More and more school districts are selling bonds to pay for consumer electronics such as netbooks and other devices for educational purposes, promising to repay investors with interest years or even decades later.

Proponents of the practice point to Proposition 39 passed by California voters in 2000, which allows districts to spend bond dollars to furnish and equip school facilities, including technology needs.

Assemblymen Curt Hagman, R-Chino Hills, and Rocky Chavez, R-Oceanside, sought to limit that practice, but the effort failed Wednesday.

The law would have prevented districts from spending voter-approved capital bond money on instructional materials, including laptops and tablet computers that are not closely connected to classroom instruction, assigned to individual pupils or that leave the school for more than one school day.

The authors argued such devices should be purchased with instructional materials funds, not bond funds.

Scam alert cap and diploma“It’s poor fiscal policy to use something that is going to have a 30- to 40-year payout to buy something that only has a shelf life of 18 to 24 months,” Chavez said. “The intent of it was to ensure that when communities take on debt like a bond, it would go toward long-term investments, like a facility.”

Hagman likened the practice to getting “a home mortgage to buy your laptop.”

“I think a $300 to $400 tablet that replaces textbooks, that is an instructional material,” Hagman said. “I haven’t seen that many student’s take a desk home to study with them.”

San Diego Assemblywomen Lorena Gonzalez and Shirley Weber, both Democrats, are committee members and attended the hearing, but chose not to vote. The bill needed four votes advance, but died 3-0.

Gonzalez cited San Diego Unified’s successful 2012 bond measure as the reason for her lack of support.

home on money pile

Spending bond proceeds on iPads is like taking out a “home mortgage to buy your laptop.” It’s financial waste & mismanagement. And it’s approved by CUSD’s self-proclaimed “villain” – Sacramento a.k.a. “the State.” We’re sure CUSD is pleased that their “villain” gave the A-OK for CUSD to waste proposed Prop E bond proceeds on iPads.

”Allowing bond money to finance equipment that’s used for instruction like iPads was a question in front of San Diego voters in 2012 when Proposition Z passed,” Gonzalez said in a statement. “Voters chose overwhelmingly to approve the bond. Parents want their children to have greater access to modern technology to stay competitive and AB 1754 would have prevented them from making that choice at the ballot box.”

Weber’s communications director, Joe Kocurek, said the assemblywoman didn’t support the bill because it “was too restrictive given evolving uses of technology in teaching.”

San Diego Unified also wrote a three-page letter opposing the bill.

Click here to read this Union-Tribune article at the source.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO because Prop E will allow CUSD to purchase iPads with bond proceeds.

No-on-Ev3-girl=phoneVote NO because Coronado taxpayers will still be paying off the proposed Prop E principal and interest long after iPads and other technology, or “tech,” purchased by CUSD becomes obsolete, goes missing, or are stolen . . . as happened in other surrounding school districts.

Vote NO because you agree with our argument AGAINST spending proposed Prop E proceeds on “tech” and iPads in your Ballot Pamphlet on page PR-1301-5.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3!

Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles

County Department of Education Contradicts CUSD, When Prop E Fails CUSD Can’t Cancel Classes & Refuse to Teach Students, Vote NO on Prop E

The County Department of Education Provides OVERSIGHT of CUSD’s Finances

oversightAccording to the San Diego County Department of Education, they provide oversight to school districts, including CUSD.

There is someone called a Consultant for Business Advisory Services who oversees CUSD’s finances.

CUSD Is DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for Its Own Finances

That doesn’t mean that CUSD has no responsibility for their own finances.

In fact, CUSD is responsible to report periodically to their Consultant at the County Department of Education.

Responsibility Rabbit teaches students to be responsible. Perhaps he can teach CUSD to be responsible for its finances, too.

Responsibility Rabbit teaches students to be responsible. Perhaps he can teach CUSD to be responsible for its finances, too.

And the CUSD Consultant at the County Department of Education is responsible to report periodically to the State Department of Education about CUSD’s finances.

CUSD’s claims that it has no bank statements and it has no responsibility to turn over its bank statements for public review and forensic audit are wrong, wrong, wrong.

Read our prior articles on the lawsuit against CUSD to open their books and release their bank statements by clicking here and here.

Since CUSD is directly responsible for its own finances, doesn’t it make sense that CUSD is responsible to provide financial transparency to the public?

No, CUSD can’t hide behind the County Department of Education and refuse to fulfill its duty of financial transparency to the public.

CUSD Must Comply With State Education Guidelines – CUSD Can’t Cancel Classes & Refuse to Educate Students

happy childrenAccording to the San Diego County Department of Education, CUSD must follow the State guidelines for public education.

CUSD can’t decide to raise its superintendent’s compensation package by 20% and refuse to provide required math/science/arts class to students. The County and the State wouldn’t allow it.

In contrast to the rumors circulating . . . from CUSD’s misinformation on its campaign website and school website . . . CUSD can’t cancel classes that the State mandates be provided to public school students.

School children raising hands in a modern classroom.Prop E supporters and CUSD employees who have stated . . . most times with anger and desperation . . . that “if Prop E fails to pass, our children’s math class will be cancelled” are wrong, wrong, wrong. That’s not fact . . . that’s fiction . . . an empty threat . . . a cheap scare tactic.

Don’t be hoodwinked by CUSD’s scare tactics and empty threats. The truth is one of the casualties of CUSD’s greedy campaign for $29 million more of our tax dollars to waste because it isn’t going to help the children at all.

When Prop E fails, the sky will not fall. When Prop E fails, students will still receive a public school education at CUSD. CUSD can’t ignore the needs of its students when Prop E fails.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO because CUSD is hiding its BANK STATEMENTS from the public to avoid transparency and forensic audit.

Vote NO because CUSD’s scare tactics and empty threats to cancel math/science/arts classes if Prop E doesn’t pass are ridiculous.

No-on-Ev3-girl=phoneVote NO to force CUSD to make reasonable budget cuts and live within its means.

Vote No on Prop E on June 3!

 

 

 

Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles, Lawsuit Against CUSD, Silly Pro-Prop E Campaign Promises

Pool Pool Pool, Prop E is a Sneaky School Pool Re-Finance Scheme, Vote NO on Prop E

Prop E School Bonds Will Pay Off the School Pool Debt

pool-lap-swimmersRemember, CUSD told us that Coronado taxpayers wouldn’t ever have to pay for the School Pool . . . because CUSD would pay to build it . . . and CUSD would pay to run it . . . and the School Pool would make money for CUSD.

Ha!

CUSD wasn’t telling the truth back then about the School Pool.

And CUSD isn’t telling the truth now about the Prop E.

Here’s how we know Prop E is a sneaky School Pool re-finance plan to shift the burden of the School Pool boondoggle onto Coronado taxpayers after all.

Sneaky, sneaky, sneaky CUSD!

Ballot Materials Prove Prop E is a Sneaky School Pool Re-Finance Plan

The only thing that matters when you cast your vote are the official BALLOT PAMPHLET materials.

Here’s what your Ballot Pamphlet materials say:

  • Page PR-1301-10, 14th line up from last line on page: The Project List also includes the refinancing of any outstanding lease obligations, or the bridge loans taken to initiate voter approved projects.

The inclusion of this sentence BURIED near the end of a loooong Wish List of projects in their ballot materials is CUSD’s sneaky way of disclosing . . . as clear as mud . . . that CUSD intends to use the 2014 Prop E school bond debts to pay off the 2005 School Pool debts.

How do we know this?

pool-lap-swimmersBecause the School Pool was financed by around $8.5 million to $11.5 million of Certificates of Participation in 2005. Wow, CUSD definitely overpaid for that School Pool!

Wasteful, wasteful, wasteful CUSD!

What are Certificates of Participation, also called COPs?

They are  “lease obligations” financed secretly behind our backs WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF CORONADO VOTERS.

As we all know from common knowledge, it’s wrong, wrong, wrong to pay off existing debts (School Pool COPs) with new debts (proposed Prop E school bonds). That’s yet another sign of financial mismanagement at CUSD.

If you want or need to read more information on the non-voter-approved COPs that financed the School Pool in 2005 . . . and you want to understand the complexity of how CUSD seeks to re-finance the School Pool boondoggle COPs through Prop E school bond debts . . . by shifting the burden of the School Pool boondoggle to Coronado property owners throughout the Prop E property tax hike . . . click on these links to go directly to our prior articles:

San Diego County Taxpayers Analysis Proves that Prop E is a Sneaky School Pool Re-Finance Plan

pool-lap-swimmersClearly the Ballot Pamphlet material is irrefutable proof that CUSD intends to use Prop E proceeds as a sneaky way to re-finance their old School Pool debts, or COPs.

But, wait, there’s more irrefutable proof!

In their 13-page analysis, the San Diego County Taxpayers Association (SDCTPA) said that CUSD failed to provide COST information for its loooong Wish List of projects in its Project List . . . except for the costs of the sneaky School Pool Certificates of Participation re-financing scheme . . . and building maintenance costs . . . neither of which should be paid for by General Obligation Bonds (GO Bonds) like the proposed Prop E school bonds . . . because GO Bonds are intended to pay for the capital projects of building new schools (which CUSD doesn’t need because CUSD has already built and enjoys using new schools and administrative buildings with NON-VOTER APPROVED Redevelopment Bond Debts) and fixing dilapidated school buildings (which CUSD buildings aren’t because they were just built around 2005).

If you want to read more about SDCTPA analysis of CUSD’s failings and the serious problems with Prop E, click on the link below to go directly to our prior article:

CUSD’s Campaign Website Misleads Voters About Prop E

CUSD’s campaign promises aren’t trustworthy.

pool-lap-swimmersForget what CUSD published on their campaign website about Prop E.

Forget what CUSD published on their school website about Prop E.

Forget CUSD’s two slick, expensive, untruthful and insulting mailer advertisements that you received in the mail.

In their “FAQs” on their campaign website, CUSD blithely says that Prop E has nothing to do with the School Pool boondoggle. We all know that lying about something doesn’t make it true.

But the existence of a “FAQs” page on CUSD’s website that has misinformation and falsehoods and spin isn’t what you’re asked to vote on.

You’re asked to vote on the information in your BALLOT PAMPHLET.

Prop E has EVERYTHING to do with the School Pool boondoggle sneaky re-finance scheme.

We’ve just shown you that it does . . . based on this factual evidence:

  • CUSD’s own Project List that CUSD submitted as it appears in your BALLOT PAMPHLET, and
  • SDCTPA analysis of the 15 problems with Prop E including the School Pool COPs as one of only two “projects” in its required Project List that CUSD provides cost estimates for.

The other “project” that CUSD provided costs for isn’t a project at all.  It’s building maintenance, which should NEVER be paid for by taxpayers through expensive school bonds that would cost us PRINCIPAL PLUS INTEREST. Prop E General Obligation Bonds shouldn’t be used for paying off old debt and operating costs of building maintenance or the COP debts for the School Pool Boondoggle.

Prop E is a slippery slope of financial mismanagement that harms the children at CUSD instead of helping them.

Who Are You Going to Trust?

Who is trustworthy?

pool-lap-swimmersCUSD who is greedily trying to extract another property tax hike out of Coronado taxpayers . . . by giving voters the bum’s rush and racing Prop E onto the June 3 Primary Election Ballot . . . and who lied about the School Pool boondoggle in the past . . . and is lying about its decreased financing since CUSD’s revenues actually INCREASED by $3.2 million in 2013 . . . and tried to hide the fact that CUSD received MORE THAN $8 MILLION INCREASE in OUR PROPERTY TAXES in 2013 . . . and is lying about not being responsible for its own books and bank statements?

Or Coronado taxpayers who are fed up with CUSD’s lies and want to restore financial sanity to CUSD’s runaway train of overspending and waste of OUR tax dollars while instilling accountability for their overspending in CUSD leaders?

Yes. Coronado taxpayers are trustworthy because we aren’t trying to get you to raise YOUR property taxes through Prop E by $60 – 90 million so we can “rake in” $29 million more of YOUR property tax dollars to waste on the School Pool boondoggle, administrators’ raises, lawyers, outside consultants, travel, memberships, and more waste.

Coronado voters who are part of the NO on E grass roots campaign are trying to restore financial sanity to an out-of-control government agency — CUSD.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO on Prop E to force CUSD to stop overspending and wasting OUR tax dollars.

No-on-Ev3-girl=phoneVote NO on Prop E to force CUSD to open their books and release their bank statements to show us how CUSD spent OUR tax dollars.

Vote NO on Prop E because you think CUSD is wrong to demand yet another property tax hike in order to bail them out of the School Pool boondoggle they created.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3!

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Articles, School Pool Boondoggle