20 mcg Misoprostol

Buy Misoprostol online without a prescription - Misoprostol 200mcg tablets express shipping

Misoprostol overnight without prescriptionTiming of the Court Case

Around the Summer of 2013 . . .  long before Coronado voters knew that CUSD was going to try to raise our property taxes through the three Prop E school bonds series . . . Coronado residents hired  Ms. Libi Uremovic to get the bank statements an other important financial records from CUSD . . . because Coronado residents were concerned about CUSD’s lack of transparency.

The court case is Uremovic vs. Coronado School District Case Number 37-2013-00060692-CL-BC-CTL. Notice the underlined year of initiation of the lawsuit is 2013 . . . last year.

You can read Ms. Uremovic’s website by clicking on this link — Misoprostol purchase canada.

Ms. Uremovic has been successful in helping taxpayers and residents in Imperial Beach, Beaumont and other cities around our Golden State.

For example, Ms. Uremovic succeeded in getting the Grand Jury of San Diego to advise Imperial Beach City to “get their financial house in order.”

You can read our other article about the court case against CUSD by clicking Misoprostol online sale without prescription.

Timing of Prop E

In February 2014, CUSD’s board of trustees unanimously voted to rush Prop E onto the June 3, 2014 Primary Election Ballot.

One of the basic rules of life is that when someone is giving you the bum’s rush . . . like CUSD is giving us voters . . . then you shouldn’t trust them . . . so you should vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

buy Misoprostol australia no prescriptionWhat is the Case Against CUSD About? – BANK STATEMENTS

In order to conduct a thorough review and a forensic audit of how CUSD spent our tax dollars, the lawsuit seeks to compel CUSD to turn over their bank statements . . . under the legal requirements of the California Public Records Act.

CUSD Tried to Get Case Against It Dismissed

CUSD is determined NOT to disclose its banks statements to the public for forensic audit . . . that CUSD filed a motion of Summary Judgment to throw the case against it out of court.

Judge Temporarily Ruled Against CUSD before May 9, 2014

Judge Styn has issued the following tentative ruling AGAINST the CUSD regarding the release of records under the California Public Records Act. The actual hearing was on Friday, May 9, but the judge has tentatively ruled AGAINST CUSD.

buy Misoprostol without prescription australiaTransparency by CUSD? Hardly.

For those wanting independent verification, the ruling that can be found at: buy cheap generic Misoprostol online canada pharmacy no prescription

It is copied in its entirety as follows:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE:

Civil – Limited CASE TYPE: Breach of Contract/Warranty

Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)

37-2013-00060692-CL-BC-CTL

UREMOVIC VS. CORONADO SCHOOL DISTRICT [IMAGED]

CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Adjudication, 02/21/2014

Respondent Coronado School District’s motion for summary judgment is denied. Petitioner fails to comply with the separate statement requirement of CCP § 437c(c)(3). The court could grant the District’s motion based on this procedural defect. However, the court exercises its discretion in favor of reaching the merits of the District’s motion.

The petition sets forth one cause of action against the District for denial of access to public records in violation of Government Code § 6253.

The District submits evidence that on June 4, 2013, Petitioner filed a Public Records Act request [SSUMF 5]; on June 12, 2013, the District provided a written response [SSUMF 7]; between June 12, 2013 and July 29, 2013, the District searched for and provided all identifiable records responsive to Petitioner’s PRA request [SSUMF 10]; the District provided responsive documents via emails of June 26, 2013 and July 8, 2013, via providing Petitioner with a “flash drive” on July 8, 2013 [SSUMF 11, 13, 15, 18, 19] and via making documents available for review on July 29, 2013 [SSUMF 36, 40]. Specifically, with respect to the “bank statements” requested by Petitioner, the District communicated to Petitioner the process used advised Petitioner that “there is no regular bank statement kept by the District of reconciliation”; and tried to assist Petitioner in formulating the scope of her requests [SSUMF 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]. On July 23, 2013, Petitioner made a second PRA request for “the Bank Statement showing the Checks Ratified By Council/Board and the Complete General Ledger for the month of June, 2013” and “Monthly Bank Statements Containing Cashed Checks . . . a monthly statement showing every deposit and check processed through the Account” [SSUMF 30]; on July 23, 2013, the District responded to this request, explaining that the District had already complied with this request via production of documents in response to Petitioner’s original PRA request and explaining that the District’s Board of Education does not “ratify checks” [SSUMF 31, 32]; on July 23, 2013, the District again responded to Petitioner by explaining that the District did not have a bank statement showing the checks “ratified by the Board,” so this record did not exist and could not be produced [SSUMF 35]. The District submits evidence that, other than what the District has already produced, the District does not have any additional documents in its actual or constructive possession that fit the Petitioner’s request for “Bank Statements listing the Purchase Warrants processed for [the District]” [SSUMF 43]; the District does not have any bank statements showing all Commercial Warrants as they are cashed in its actual or constructive possession [SSUMF 44]; the District has provided Petitioner with all identifiable documents in the District’s possession that are responsive to Petitioner’s PRA request [SSUMF 47]; aside from the documents the District has already made available to Petitioner there are no additional existing documents in the District’s possession response to Petitioner’s PRA request [SSUMF 48]; and the District is not withholding any records responsive to Petitioner, nor is the District withholding any records on the basis of an exemption under the PRA or any other applicable law [SSUMF 49].

In opposition, Plaintiff raises the issue of records regarding cafeteria expenditures.

In reply, the District acknowledges that it maintains a separate fund for the cafeteria expenditures, but fails to address whether the District has produced documents relating to cafeteria expenditures or explain why such documents were not included in Plaintiff’s PRA requests.

Absent evidence regarding production of documents relating to cafeteria expenditures, the court finds the District fails to meet its burden on summary judgment.

Event ID: 1340145

TENTATIVE RULINGS Calendar No.: 5

Page: 1

CASE TITLE:UREMOVIC VS. CORONADO CASE NUMBER:

SCHOOL DISTRICT [IMAGED]

37-2013-00060692-CL-BC-CTL

Court Hearing on May 9, 2014 – Judge Reserved His Ruling to be Released Shortly

The parties appeared in San Diego Superior Court Department C-62 before Judge Styn.

For the report on that May 9 hearing, click here.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO because CUSD won’t release its bank statements.

Vote NO because CUSD is spending OUR tax dollars on an attorney to hide its bank statements.

buy Misoprostol without a percsriptionVote NO because no matter how the judge rules on CUSD’s Summary Judgment motion, CUSD has hidden its bank statements from public review to avoid forensic audit by an independent outside auditor.

Vote NO because we can’t trust CUSD with $29 million more in school bond proceeds (extra funds) . . . which will cost us around double or triple that amount (around $60 – 90 million) in property tax hikes . . .  when CUSD refuses to come clean and disclose its banks statements for public review and forensic audit.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3!

Tagged with: buy discounted Misoprostol online, buy Misoprostol india, buy Misoprostol online without a prescription, buy generic isotretinoin no prescription, buy generic Misoprostol online, buy generic Misoprostol online no prescription, buy generic Misoprostol online no prescription quick delivery
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription, buy genuine Misoprostol in the u.s.

buy Misoprostol without a prescription

CUSD is Fighting Hard Against Opening Its Books & Won’t Release Its BANK STATEMENTS

Misoprostol overnight without prescriptionIn court on May 9, CUSD’s lawyer Kelly Owens and CUSD’s assistant superintendent for business services (CUSD finances) Keith Butler said that they want to continue hiding CUSD’s bank statements.

CUSD refuses to disclose its bank statements for public review in order to avoid a forensic audit can be conducted to see exactly how CUSD spent OUR tax dollars.

For our prior article explaining the details of the lawsuit against CUSD, click buy Misoprostol without a prescription in the united states.

Court Hearing on May 9, 2014

In court on May 9, CUSD’s lawyer Kelly Owens argued that “they gave all the documents they have” to the Ms. Uremovic in response to Ms. Uremovic’s document request under the Public Information Act of California.

The problem is that CUSD dumped 1,700 pages of documents on plaintiff Ms. Libi Uremovic . . . but refused to hand over CUSD’s bank statements.

CUSD’s Defenses – CUSD Contradicts Itself and Says “CUSD’s Finances Are Confusing”

The Judge is impartial and neutral in this matter.

buy non prescription drugs generic MisoprostolHe asked CUSD’s lawyer if they supplied the cafeteria account information to Ms. Uremovic and they stated they had done so.

The Judge said that CUSD didn’t say that they supplied the cafeteria account information in the papers they filed in court and, naturally, he didn’t have time yet to go through the 1,700 papers they gave to Ms. Uremovic and to the court.

CUSD lawyer Owens said that “CUSD is unique and doesn’t have bank statements” and “the County Department of Education is responsible for all CUSD’s finances — not CUSD.”

CUSD assistant superintendent Keith Butler then contradicted CUSD lawyer Owens and said that “CUSD isn’t unique . . . no school districts have bank statements” and “the County Department of Education is responsible for the finances of all school districts.”

CUSD’s lawyer Owens said “it’s very confusing . . . “ and “the bank statements Ms. Uremovic seeks don’t exist.”

All in all, it was a sad showing by CUSD and a sad moment for public transparency.

Plaintiff’s Arguments in Court

buy online Misoprostol 20 mcgMs. Uremovic argued that CUSD is doing inter-fund transfers without disclosing them to the public . . . which is illegal.

She stated that the cafeteria account information is only one example.

Ms. Uremovic also said that another example is that CUSD pays off its existing Prop KK bond debt . . .  millions upon millions of OUR tax dollars spent to pay off principal and interest on prior school bond debt . . . without disclosing it to the public . . .  because CUSD does it through inter-fund transfers . . . and the BANK STATEMENTS are the only documents that can trace those and other transactions to see where OUR money is really going.

Did CUSD’s Lawyer Try to Mislead the Judge in Court?

As an example of CUSD’s possible lack of ethics and integrity . . . CUSD’s lawyer who is paid handsomely with OUR tax dollars . . . to defend CUSD in court against OPENING CUSD’s BOOKS and against disclosing CUSD’s BANK STATEMENTS to see how CUSD really spent OUR money . . . CUSD’s lawyer may have tried to mislead the Judge in court.

Here’s what happened:

buy Misoprostol

Baseball legend Babe Ruth gives the bum’s rush to James Leo “One-Eyed” Connelly in the 1930s.

Ms. Uremovic stated that the Judge’s decision is important because CUSD has rushed its measure for 3 series of school bonds  . . .  Prop E . .. onto the June 3 Primary Election Ballot . . . and CUSD’s books and bank statements are important for voters to review because we don’t know whether or not CUSD needs the Prop E school bonds until we see how much of OUR tax dollars CUSD wastes.

CUSD’s lawyer Kelly Owens quickly jumped in and volunteered that, basically, “Yes, you know how it goes, Judge. These lawsuits against school district’s bond measures are intended to defeat school bonds that impoverished school districts like CUSD need so desperately.”  This is a paraphrase . . . not her exact words.

No . . . Ms. Uremovic didn’t file her lawsuit to defeat Prop E . . . because Ms. Uremovic filed her lawsuit in Summer 2013 . . . LAST year . . . and no one from the public knew about CUSD’s plans to rush Prop E onto the June 3 Primary Election Ballot until . . . February of THIS year . . .  when the CUSD board of trustees voted unanimously to rush Prop E onto the June ballot during one of their meetings.

It’s likely the Judge didn’t buy CUSD’s lawyer’s possible attempt to mislead the court and to, basically, attempt to disparage Ms. Uremovic.

But CUSD’s possible attempts to disparage Ms. Uremovic and to mislead the Judge are important.

Why?

Because CUSD’s behavior shows that CUSD’s culture posibly lacks ethics and integrity. If CUSD can try to mislead a Judge in court in order to win a Summary Judgment motion . . . then CUSD can easily mislead voters in its campaign to gain $29 million through the Prop E property tax hike.

Judge to Rule By Wednesday

The Judge said he will rule by Wednesday at the latest on CUSD’s motion to dismiss the case through its Summary Judgment motion.

buy Misoprostol 20mcgNo matter what the Judge decides . . . we think it stinks that CUSD continues to hide its BANK STATEMENTS from the public.

To say that CUSD has no BANK STATEMENTS . . . as CUSD’s assistant superintendent Keith Butler said and as CUSD’s lawyer Kelly Owens said . . . is outrageous.

CUSD is pretending that it has no responsibility to keep or to review its own bank statements.

CUSD is pointing the finger and claiming that the County Department of Education has the responsibility for CUSD’s financial records.

CUSD is claiming that it has no duty to review its own BANK STATEMENTS  to reconcile its accounts . . . CUSD claims it has no duty to get the bank statements from the County Department of Education and to release the bank statements to Ms. Uremovic.

This is a giant red flag for voters . . . who may conclude that CUSD wastes OUR tax dollars . . . and hides the evidence of its waste . . .  and acts like an unaccountable spoiled child who won’t show us how they spent OUR tax dollars.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

No matter what the Judge rules by Wednesday, vote NO on Prop E because CUSD refuses to release CUSD’s BANK STATEMENTS for public review and forensic audit.

buy Misoprostol online made in americaVote NO on Prop E because CUSD refuses to direct the County Department of Education to release CUSD’s BANK STATEMENTS to the public for review and forensic audit.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3!

* Statements in quotes are paraphrases, not exact quotes.

Tagged with: buy Misoprostol online uk, buy Misoprostol online without prescription from canada, buy Misoprostol online without prescription, buy Misoprostol no prescription, buy generic Misoprostol online no prescription
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription, buy genuine Misoprostol in the u.s.

buy Misoprostol online

Buy Misoprostol online without a prescription - Misoprostol 200mcg tablets express shipping

buy Misoprostol online with no perscriptionIt’s difficult to know whether to laugh or cry at the things Prop E supporters write online.

To read our prior article Prop E Supporters Have It All Wrong & Seriously Underestimate the Cost & Duration of Bond Debt Repayment, Vote NO on Prop E, click buy Misoprostol online with no prescription.

You’ll read in that prior article that . . . over at Coronado.Patch.com . . . a Prop E supporter named “Kathleen” is so very wrong, wrong, wrong about Prop E . . . in a comment she wrote targeting a Prop E opponent named Julia who posted a thoughtful comment.

Well, our friend “Kathleen” posted another comment after a friendly Prop E opponent let “Kathleen” know . . .  in a very nice way . . . that she was wrong about the cost of Prop E to property taxpayers. “Kathleen” seriously underestimated the cost of the proposed Prop E property tax hike on Julia.

We don’t know whether to laugh or cry . . . because . . . it’s amusing that “Kathleen” is firm in her denial . . . but it’s sad that she and voters like her are going to vote on Prop E when they don’t understand it at all.

We can’t help but notice that it’s CUSD’s job to inform voters about the true facts about Prop E since CUSD is trying to raise our property taxes over and above the constitutional limit set by the Proposition 13 constitutional amendment to the California State Constitution.

But . . . then again . . . voters who know the truth will vote NO on Prop E.

So you can see why CUSD continues to misinform voters . . . and Prop E supporters continue to be misinformed.

The Friendly Comment to “Kathleen”

Here’s the friendly comment to “Kathleen.” You’ll notice the tone and content is very nice and neighborly.

buy Misoprostol over the counterJerry Toci May 08, 2014 at 03:44 PM
Kathleen, I agree with Mr. Tato, Jim Brown and Julia Viera. You misread the bond’s repayment formula. Piper Jaffray touts an example of tax increase for homeowners as being $32.87 per year per $100,000 of ASSESSED VALUATION (a $1mil home would pay $328.70 per year) HOWEVER, as is fully disclosed in the Voter Information Pamphlet, the amount will be determined by what the bonds actually SELL for, and the cost to homeowners can be up to 12 TIMES that amount. Further, the school district and underwriters can make us pay such an amount for 10, 25, or 40 years! CUSD plans to spend the money within 9 years, after which the overpaid administrators will be long gone, collecting their fat pensions. To repay this unnecessary $29 million loan, homeowners actually will shell out $42 million – $60 million dollars! The bonding costs are enormous. Think about how many truly beneficial, long-lasting projects could be built with that much money.

“Kathleen’s” Second Unfriendly Comment

buy Misoprostol with no prescriptionAs we wrote in our prior article available here, “Kathleen’s” first comment wasn’t just WRONG . . . it was bullying, patronizing, condescending and entitled.

Well, her second comment is more of the same:

Kathleen May 09, 2014 at 01:07 AM
I didn’t misread anything. YOU are mistaken, Mr. Toci. You’re spreading misinformation and outright lies. I provided Julia with correct information about what her annual bond debt would be and it is only for 10 years…that’s it! I support our CUSD Board of Trustees and our Superintendent. You should consider being part of the solution instead of the problem. Sacramento is the villain here not CUSD and our kids deserve better. Vote YES on E!!!

 

The Problems with “Kathleen’s” Second Unfriendly Comment

buy Misoprostol without rx

Whew! There are so many problems with “Kathleen’s” comment . . . it’s difficult to know where to begin.

Let’s discuss 8 of the problems with “Kathleen’s” unfriendly comment.

Read the Ballot Pamphlet for the Facts – Don’t Be Hoodwinked by CUSD’s Pro-Tax Hike Spin

First, she did indeed misread the bond repayment formula.

It’s silly for “Kathleen” to insist that Julia’s total property tax hike would be “only” $32.87 per year for 10 years.

buy Misoprostol next day deliveryAccording to our Ballot Pamphlet materials . . . which we assume “Kathleen” hasn’t read and won’t ever read . . . if Julia’s house was worth $1.5 million, her property tax hike would look like this:

  1. $39.87 per $100,000 assessed property value (times 15) = $598.05 per year for the first bond issue for up to 40 years = $23,922
  2. $31.19 per $100,000 assessed property value (times 15) = $467.85 per year for the second bond issue for up to 40 years = $18,714
  3. $39.87 per $100,000 assessed property value (times 15) = $598.05 per year for the third bond issue for up to 40 years = $23,922.

Total Prop E property tax hike for Julia could be up to almost $67,000!

Stop Calling Prop E Opponents Wrong – Prop E Opponents are Right

buy Misoprostol online no prescription

P.T. Barnum was right. There’s a sucker born every minute.

Second, Mr. Toci isn’t mistaken. He’s correct.

It’s common knowledge that the repayment of school bond debts is usually double or triple the face value. So CUSD’s $29 million face value of General Obligation Bonds . . . called GO Bonds . . . will probably cost Coronado taxpayers $58 – 87 million!

Stop Falsely Accusing Prop E Opponents of Lying – CUSD & Prop E Pundits Are Obviously Lying To You

Third, “Kathleen” is way over the line wrong when she accuses Mr. Toci of “spreading misinformation and outright lies.”

Project much? ‘Nuf said.

Stop Underestimating the Enormous Costs of the Prop E Bond Debts – Think About It – Would There Be Such an Uproar Against Prop E If It “Only” Cost Us Next to Nothing?

Fourth, “Kathleen” clearly provided misinformation to Julia.

buying Misoprostol with no rxFor goodness sakes . . . if merely $38.97 per year for 10 years is all that Coronado property taxpayers would be forced to pay for the Prop E property tax hike burden of debt repayment of principal plus interest . . . like “Kathleen” stubbornly and incorrectly insists . . . do you think there would be such strong opposition to Prop E as exists in our community?

Of course not.

Opponents of Prop E . . . UNDERSTAND  . . . Prop E. That’s why we’re voting NO on Prop E on June 3.

Indeed, as Mr. Toci wrote, “The bonding costs are enormous.” 

Stop Insisting Coronado Property Taxpayers Will Be Able to Pay Back the Principal & Interest on the 3 Series of Prop E School Bonds in 10 Years – CUSD’s Rosy Prediction of 10 Years is Improbable & Unenforceable

buying Misoprostol onlineFifth, the bond debt repayment would probably last BEYOND 10 years. CUSD stated it intends to issue three series of bond debts in 10 years. CUSD will take it’s money and run . . . and leave us with the bill . . . to repay the principal plus interest on the school bond debts.

Regardless of what the CUSD snake oil salesmen promise voters to trick them into voting for Prop E . . . it can take us . . . the property taxpayers . . . legally . . . up to 40 years under the law to pay back the bond debt of principal and interest.

CUSD can re-finance the bond debt issues . . . over and over again for 40 years . . . it’s called “rolling over” the bond debt . . . and there’s nothing we can do about it if Prop E passes.

CUSD re-financed . . . rolled over . . . the 1998 Prop KK CUSD school bond debts in 2012. CUSD has rolled over its  bond debt before . . . it will do so again. Past behavior is the best predictor of future performance.

It’s common knowledge that bond debt repayment . . . for each bond issue . . . usually . . . and legally . . . takes around 25-40 years.

buying Misoprostol online without prescriptionCUSD’s snake oil salesmen and pundits are trying to hoodwink voters into believing that all debt will be repaid . . . by Coronado property taxpayers . . . in 10 years. But CUSD can’t legally be held to any of its rosy promises. This is all explained in your Ballot Pamphlet materials . . . and on this website.

CUSD doesn’t control the bond market . . . CUSD doesn’t control the bond interest rates . . . so . . . LEGALLY . . . CUSD could force us to repay the Prop E bond debt for up to 40 years!

Open your eyes . . .  Read your Ballot Pamphlet materials . . . Refuse to be misinformed like “Kathleen” is misinformed.

can i buy Misoprostol onlineStop Trying To Shame Prop E Opponents Into Joining You in Your Folly

Sixth, “Kathleen” tries to target Mr. Toci as the problem . . . and tries to shame Mr. Toci out of his correct interpretation of the bond repayment program . . . by writing “you should consider being a part of the solution instead of part of the problem.”

What the what? The “problem” is that Prop E supporters don’t understand Prop E  . . . and refuse to listen to reasonable people who explain Prop E to them.

Stop Making the State (Sacramento) the Villain – Demand Financial Transparency, Accountability & Reason from CUSD Who Created Its Financial Woes By Ignoring the Needs of Our Children

can i get Misoprostol without a prescription?Seventh, “Kathleen” regurgitates the Big Lie that “Sacramento (the State of California) is the villain here not CUSD” . . . when we know CUSD’s well-documented wasteful spending and financial mismanagement is the problem . . . heck . . . CUSD received a $3.2 million INCREASE in funding in 2013 and still spent more than it “raked in” in revenues in 2013.

CUSD’s claims of “the sky is falling” and the State (Sacramento) is villain who caused our “financial crisis” . . . are silly.

The people responsible for CUSD’s financial woes are the people who are running CUSD . . . into the ground.

Wake up!

can i get Misoprostol without rxStop Hiding Behind the Children

Eighth, “Kathleen” falls back on “the children deserve better” when . . . in fact . . . the children of CUSD could have had $3.2 million in INCREASED revenues . . . for classes, programs, teachers, and more . . . but CUSD administrators and trustees wasted that windfall on everything but the children . . . superintendent’s 20% raise . . . top heavy administration’s compensation . . . attorneys . . . outside consultants . . . travel  . . . conferences . . . the School Pool boondoggle!

The Children Deserve Better Than Prop E

The children of CUSD deserve better administrators and better trustees who focus on the CHILDREN instead of greedily grasping non-stop for more money . . . money . . . money . . . to feed their overspending addiction.

canada MisoprostolThe children of CUSD deserve better teachers who don’t refuse to teach their students in class . . . and instead waste an entire class period to propagandize to non-voting children about CUSD’s “financial crisis” (of CUSD’s own creation) and CUSD’s  “desperate need” for (unnecessary) Prop E. Yes, parents have told us they are upset that their children’s teacher refused to teach an entire English class and instead propagandized about Prop E . . . to non-voting students . . . who weren’t taught that day. Professional teachers who care about children don’t deprive students of teaching or conduct political propaganda sessions during class time. For shame!

The children of CUSD deserve better voters who care enough to vote NO on Prop E . . . in order to force CUSD . . . to cut its well-documented wasteful spending . . . to live within its means . . . and to responsibly manage this small public school district in our small town.

Reach Out to Prop E Supporters and Help Them Understand

canadian generic Misoprostol no prescriptionIf you know voters like “Kathleen,” please reach out to them in a friendly, neighborly way . . . like Mr. Toci did on Coronado Patch . . . and help them understand Prop E.

If they are addicted to the CUSD Kool-Aid, you probably can’t reach them.

But if they didn’t drink the Kool-Aid yet, you may be able to help them see that the costs of Prop E will be enormous.

Don’t let your friends and neighbors underestimate the cost and duration of Prop E.

When voters cast misinformed votes, we all lose.

Vote NO on Prop E

canadian pharmacy no prescription MisoprostolVote NO on Prop E because it’s too expensive.

Vote NO on Prop E because it’s simply another credit card for CUSD to max out like a spoiled child.

Vote NO on Prop E because it’s the only way that CUSD will be forced to stick to a reasonable budget plan.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Tagged with: canadian pharmacy Misoprostol, cheap Misoprostol no prescription, cheap generic Misoprostol no prescription, cheap Misoprostol without a prescription, cheap online pharmacy for Misoprostol, cheap prices on Misoprostol, cheap Misoprostol, cheap Misoprostol online no prescription, cheapest online indian pharmacy for Misoprostol or generic
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription, Misoprostol precio, do you need a prescription for Misoprostol in mexico

Misoprostol

The Internet Is the Scene of The Crime Where Prop E Supporters Seriously Underestimate the COST & DURATION of Prop E Bond Debt Repayment

Social media is a double-edged sword. The internet makes it easier to spread important information. Unfortunately, many times the information that’s being spread is wrong, wrong, wrong. Take Prop E supporters. Misoprostol onlineThey are spreading so much misinformation online, it’s overwhelming. Why do they do it? Because voters who know the truth will vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Prop E supporters seriously underestimate the cost and duration of the Prop E b bond debt repayment.

Bullies

Are you tired of Prop E supporters crying “victim” and calling you “mean” while they bully you and say mean things about you? You’re not alone. Prop E supporters are bold enough to bully others online who don’t agree with them. But Prop E supporters aren’t thoughtful enough to check the facts.

Reading – Put Down That Kool-Aid and Read the Facts

Here’s page 7 of the 2013 CUSD audit: Misoprostol without a prescription To read the entire 2013 CUSD audit by Christy White Associates, click generic 200mcg Misoprostol online. Here’s what we read on page 7 above in black and white: CUSD’s funding INCREASED by $3.2+ million in 2013. Look at the “Net Change” column (vertical) for the “Total Revenues” row (horizontal) . . . CUSD’s revenue went up $3,236,883 . . . that’s $3.2+ million. Here’s what we heard voters read in an online item:

generic Misoprostol canada

Kool-Aid: The beverage of choice for cult members.

Bombshell #2: Audit Proves CUSD funding INCREASED $3.2 million in 2013! Sounds true to us. The facts speak for themselves. Here’s what we heard a Prop E supporter wrote in response to that online item: “That’s a deceitful lie.” Really? A true fact . . . CUSD’s funding INCREASED $3.2 million in 2013 . . . is called a “deceitful lie” by a Prop E supporter? Prop E supporters need to accept the reality of true facts . . . not embarrass themselves and mislead others by calling a true fact a “lie.” Put down that CUSD Kool-Aid . . . Open your eyes . . . Read the facts . . . CUSD is lying to our community by saying that they are in a “financial crisis” because their “funding decreased.” You know who Prop E supporters should be angry at?  CUSD . . . for manipulating them into believing their Big Lies of “decreased funding” and “financial crisis.” You know who Prop E supporters should stop bullying and being mean to? NO on E voters . . . who refuse to drink CUSD’s Kool-Aid.

Mathematics – Dissection of a Typical Internet Comment From a Prop E Supporter

Over at www.Coronado.Patch.com, John Tato posted his article Reasons to Oppose Proposition E on why he’s voting NO on Prop E. A thoughtful commenter named Julia posted a comment on why she’s voting NO on Prop E. This is America . . . we have our First Amendment right of free speech . . . well, no, not really . . . there’s no real freedom of speech in Coronado with Prop E supporters around. generic MisoprostolA pro-tax hike commenter named “Kathleen” tried to set Julia straight . . . except she didn’t.  All “Kathleen” did was prove that she can’t read and she can’t add numbers. Poor thing. “Kathleen” doesn’t understand Prop E, but she’s voting for it. It’s interesting to us that “Kathleen” completely ignored John Tato’s Patch article, with its well-researched facts and its mountain of evidence against Prop E. It’s interesting that “Kathleen” targeted Juila for to bully online. If “Kathleen” understood the true facts, she would vote AGAINST Prop E. Read it all on Patch by clicking generic Misoprostol from india. Here’s “Kathleen’s” comment: Kathleen May 05, 2014 at 08:46 PM Julia, Based on your home’s assessed value, you would only have to pay $32.87 per year for the school bond. That’s just $.09 a day. It would be nice if a bridge toll could be used to support our schools, but that is CALTRANS and that money will never be allowed to support CUSD. Oh, brother. There are so many things wrong with “Kathleen’s” comment! Where do we begin? First, it’s creepy that “Kathleen” thinks she knows the assessed value of Julia’s home. How did she find out where Julia lives? After she figured out where Julia lives, did “Kathleen” call the San Diego County Tax Collector to get the true assessed value for Julia’s house?

generic Misoprostol no prescription

Morticia Addams: Paving the way for cute and creepy girls since 1964

Second, where the heck did “Kathleen” come up with $32.87? If “Kathleen” read her Ballot Pamphlet page PR-1301-3, which is easily available to her online or in her mailbox, she would know that the rosy predictions from CUSD superintendent Felix were 3 separate bond issues for a total face value of $29 million with rosy, estimated costs to property owners of:

  • $39.87
  • $31.19, and
  • $39.87.

Not $32.87. Sorry, “Kathleen.” You’re wrong. Third, if “Kathleen” read her Ballot Pamphlet page PR-1301-3, she would know that CUSD’s rosy cost prediction is PER $100,000 ASSESSED PROPERTY VALUE. So, unless Julia’s house is assessed at $100,000 . . . which is impssoble . . . “Kathleen” got it wrong again. The way bond cost predictions work is you take the estimated dollar amounts and multiply (times) them by each $100,000 of the assessed value of your property  . . . which the County Tax Collector assesses . . . not CUSD . . . in order to calculate your property tax hike for the proposed Prop E school bond. So if Julia’s house is worth $1.5 million, that’s $39.87 and $31.19 times 15 because there are 15 $100,000s in $1.5 million. Or, to put the same concept another way, $1.5 million divided by $100,000 is 15. And remember . . . our assessed property values increase at the whim of the County Tax Assessor . . . which increases CUSD’s amount of our tax dollars they “rake in” every year . . . and . . . it also increases the potential Prop E burden on property owners over the years. generic Misoprostol onlineThis is BASIC MATH . . . not nuclear physics. So using basic math, along with “Kathleen’s” wrong number, if Julia’s house was assessed at $1.5 million, the cost per year of her property tax hike . . . over and above her annual tax hike under Proposition 13 . . . would be (“Kathleen’s” wrong number) $32.87 times 15 . . . which is $493.05 per year . . . or nearly $500 per year . . . not $32.87 per year as “Kathleen” incorrectly wrote. To add insult to injury, “Kathleen” incorrectly chides Julia by writing that her (completely wrong) property tax hike of $32.87 is “9 cents per day” . . . wrong again, “Kathleen.” Fourth, why does “Kathleen” feel entitled to tell Julia that Julia would “only” have to pay (insert any amount of property tax hike here). Who died and made “Kathleen” boss? Why does “Kathleen” feel entitled to patronize Julia and tell her, essentially, to shut up and give CUSD more money because it’s “only” (insert any amount here). generic Misoprostol online no prescriptionWhether or not a taxpayer can afford yet another tax hike  . . . and whether or not that taxpayer thinks yet another tax hike is justified by any public bureaucracy . . . is a personal decision for each taxpayer to make. “Kathleen” doesn’t get to decide that for everyone else. Shame on you, “Kathleen.” Fifth, who made “Kathleen” the authority on CalTRANS and tolls? Did she contact a person in authority at CalTRANS and get it in writing that, as “Kathleen” wrote: “It would be nice if a bridge toll could be used to support our schools, but that is CALTRANS and that money will never be allowed to support CUSD.” “Kathleen’s” condescending tone is very un-neighborly to put it mildly. Sixth, “Kathleen” completely misses the boat on the DURATION of the bond debt repayment. Using “Kathleen’s” (wrong number of) $32.87 per $100,000 assessed property value per year for (the wrong duration of) 10 years as cited by other Prop E supporters . . . is around $500 per year for 10 years . . . which is $5,000  . . .  for Julia to pay off her additional burden of the repayment of principal and interest on  . . . merely 1 series of bond issues . . . out of the three that CUSD intends to issue . . . for the proposed Prop E ballot measure. We don’t know how wealthy “Kathleen” is, but $5,000  . . . for yet another property tax hike . . . on top of the annual property tax under Proposition 13 . . . and CUSD’s Prop KK property tax hike we are still paying off for CUSD’s previous school bond . . . and Southwestern College’s Prop CC tax hike we are still paying off for their school bond . . .  is a lot of money to any person who knows the value of a dollar. Maybe “Kathleen” is as rich as Mrs. Jay Z . . . you know . . . Beyonce . . . but the rest of us aren’t made of money. Do you think “Kathleen” would offer to pay her share AND our shares of the Prop E property tax hike burden? We don’t either.

What Prop E Supporters Don’t Understand – County Counsel’s Independent Analysis Sets the Facts Straight

In a nutshell, Prop E supporters are so overwhelmed with melodramatic emotion and broad generalities of “supporting our schools” and “helping our children” that they are easy prey for CUSD and its cronies to ensure they will make a fortune off of ALL Coronado taxpayers if the Prop E tax hike is approved. Here’s how it works. generic Misoprostol without a precsriptionsRead page PR-1301-1 and 2 of your Ballot Pamphlet.  See how the County Counsel’s Independent Analysis proves that . . . legally . . . CUSD can indebt Coronado property taxpayers up to $60 per year per $100,000 assessed property value for up to 40 years. So, let’s do the math on that reality . . . $60 per year on Julia’s $1.5 million assessed property value for 40 years is . . . $60 times 15 times 40 . . . which is $36,000! Do you think “Kathleen” would still chide Juila and tell her, in essence, to shut up because Julia “only” has to pay an additional $36,000 in property taxes over the next 40 years so that CUSD can have yet another school bond . . . instead of the sensible option of CUSD making the hard choices . . . and cutting out its wasteful spending . . . and keeping their hands out of our wallets? We certainly wouldn’t tell Julia that. We respect our neighbors.

Still Not Convinced? CUSD Superintendent’s Extensive Legal Disclaimer Admits His Rosy Cost Estimates are Wrong

generic Misoprostol without prescription

“Several mediocre minds concocted an impractical plan.”

If you don’t believe the County Counsel’s Independent Analysis . . . which is impartial and unbiased . . . then read page PR-1301-3 of your Ballot Pamphlet. There you will see CUSD superintendent Jeff Felix’s . . . untitled yet extensive . . . legal disclaimer  . . . which says, in essence, that his rosy cost predictions are wrong. CUSD can’t be held to any rosy promises about the low costs they claim ($39.87 and $31.19) for the short duration they claim (10 years, or until 2024). It’s the worst of all worlds . . . because . . .  according to Felix’s legal disclaimer . . . Prop E would give CUSD sole discretion on when to issue the 3 series of bonds . . . but CUSD doesn’t control the bond market interest rates.

Bond Interest Rates Are Key

Bond interest rates are key. The higher the interest rates, the higher the cost of debt repayment for Coronado taxpayers. CUSD’s rosy claim is that they will issue the bonds at less than 1% interest rates. Ha! CUSD would be lucky to get 3% to 5% interest rates on its school bonds. The interest rate on the Prop E school bonds could legally go up to 12%! Prop E would cost us all SO MUCH MORE than Prop E supporters understand.

Basic Survival Rules

As a basic rule of life, if you don’t know what you’re talking about . . . it’s best to say nothing at all . . . silence is golden. As a basic rule of voting, if you don’t understand the ballot proposition . . . vote NO and move on. Why? Because when ballot proponents make their ballot materials so complex and confusing that the ballot supporters themselves don’t understand what they’re supporting . . . someone is trying to pull a fast one on the voters . . . don’t fall for that old trick. To read our next article Prop E Supporters Refuse to Accept Reality of ENORMOUS Costs of Prop E, Don’t  Drink the CUSD Kook-Aid, Vote NO on Prop E, click generic Misoprostol without prescription canada.

Vote NO on Prop E

Vote NO because when you read the facts, Prop E is bad deal for taxpayers. get Misoprostol without prescriptionVote NO because when you do the math, Prop E costs WAY TOO MUCH for FAR TOO LONG. Vote NO on Prop E on June 3 to force CUSD to live within its means.

Tagged with: getting Misoprostol without doctor, how to buy Misoprostol without a prescription, how to by Misoprostol online, how to get Misoprostol online no prescription in 200 days, how to get Misoprostol, how to order Misoprostol online without a prescription, how to order Misoprostol, how to purchase isotretinoin, I need to order isotretinoin without presciption and order it COD, i need to order Misoprostol without a prescription, i want to buy pregnizone without a prescription, india Misoprostol, indian Misoprostol, is it legal to buy Misoprostol online, Misoprostol online no prescription 200 mcg, low price rx online website Misoprostol, mail order Misoprostol, Misoprostol 20mcg, Misoprostol in Canada, Misoprostol online cheap, Misoprostol online no prescription, Misoprostol without prescription, Misoprostol oral tablet no prescription discount, Misoprostol tablets 20 mcg no prescription australia, no prescription Misoprostol
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription, do you need a prescription for Misoprostol in mexico

non prescription Misoprostol

CUSD Fails at Transparency

online pharmacy no prescription MisoprostolWe know why, as a rule, CUSD fails at transparency.

Because if voters knew the true facts about Prop E, they would vote NO.

To read our prior article about how CUSD superintendent Jeff Felix failed to answer questions from a voter, click online pharmacy Misoprostol.

So CUSD’s campaign is nothing but smoke and mirrors because it’s comprised of merely . . . melodrama . . . spin . . .  omissions . . . falsehoods . . . empty threats . . . and cheap scare tactics.

CUSD has nothing but a smoke and mirrors campaign because a Prop E is a property tax hike. And a property tax hike is a hard sell.

So consider CUSD the snake oil salesman, or used car salesman, trying to get voters to buy (or voter) something they don’t need (another property tax hike) just like an ethically challenged salesman.

Caveat emptor means buyer beware.

We urge this — voters beware.

CUSD Trustee Failed to Answer Questions . . . Again

order Misoprostol onlineYou can read our prior article on CUSD trustee Bruce Shepherd’s failure to answer voter-resident-attorney-property owner Pete Fagan’s important and relevant questions about Prop E’s negative impacts on Coronado by clicking order Misoprostol online no prescription.

Well, our CUSD trustee is at it again . . . failing to respond to questions from another voter.

Eight days ago, on April 28, voter-resident-property owner Jerry Toci asked these important and relevant questions of the CUSD trustee Bruce Shepherd:

Comment by Jerry Toci on April 28, 2014 at 2:28pm

Questions for board member Bruce Shepherd:

Dear Mr. Shepherd,

I know we can count on you to clarify some issues. Recently, Asst. Superintendent Keith Butler stated that the bond underwriting firm of Stone & Youngberg (currently subject of a statewide ethics investigation) has not “helped” with the development or promotion of Prop E.

order Misoprostol online overnight shipping1. Can you guarantee property owners that neither Stone & Youngberg nor its successors will not participate in, or profit from the sale of Prop E bonds if the measure passes?

2. Are any of the following “helping” or “have helped” or “will help” with the Prop e property tax levy campaign?

Raindrop Marketing

KN Comics

Clifford Moss, LLC – political consultant/author of “How to Win School Bond Campaigns”

order generic Misoprostol online no prescriptionPiper Jaffray bond underwriters

De La Rosa bond underwriters

George K. Baum bond underwriters

RBC Capital Markets bond underwriters

Other bond underwriters, bond managers, bond co-managers, or lead bond managers

Capital Bond Partners LLC

JPMorgan/Chase Bank

CalSTRS or California State Teachers Union or its representatives

Coronado (CUSD) Teachers Union or its representatives

Other teacher/school district unions or their representatives

Any and all other trade unions or their representatives

Any and all other Unions or their representatives

order Misoprostol mastercard3. It appears that the above individuals and organizations have provided comics & cartoons, consultant reports, consultant workshops, meetings, campaign donations in cash or cash equivalents, donations of gifts in kind, donations of technical expertise and other assistance in advocating and promoting Measure E for placement on the June 3 ballot.

What type of assistance or promotion services has been provided by those listed in #2 above, and what has been or will be the compensation for these individuals and organizations? Having this information will help Coronado voters decide whether to vote “for” or “against” Measure E.

Thanks very much.

To date, we’ve heard nothing but crickets (silence) back from Bruce or anyone else at CUSD.

You can read about it on eCoronado by clicking order Misoprostol online no prescription Pharma Life.

Why is CUSD So Secretive?

order Misoprostol without rxWhat’s the fuss, CUSD?

CUSD is legally required to be transparent about its public finances . . . about its campaign finances . . .about virtually everything.

Why?

Because CUSD is a PUBLIC agency that spends OUR tax dollars. We are entitled to follow the money.

In fact, as citizens, we are supposed to follow the money . . . in order to provide democratic oversight of the school district.

CUSD, why do you refuse to be honest with voters about who is financing your pro-tax hike campaign?

It’s common knowledge in California that school districts outspend opponents 200 to 1 during school bond campaigns for tax hikes.

As a result, CUSD is outspending us at the ratio of 200:1.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

order MisoprostolVote NO because CUSD isn’t honest about who is financially backing them to force the tax hike on us.

Vote NO because CUSD isn’t transparent with voters.

Vote NO because CUSD’s lack of honesty and lack of transparency means CUSD is untrustworthy.

Vote NO because it’s silly for us to pay principal and interest on the $29 million face amount of public school bond debt that CUSD seeks through yet another tax hike . . . when CUSD can’t even be bothered to give us important information that they’re legally required to provide.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

 

Tagged with: order Misoprostol online consultation, order Misoprostol overnight, order Misoprostol no prescription, ordering Misoprostol from canada without a prescription, ordering Misoprostol online, ordering Misoprostol online without a precription, overnight no prescription Misoprostol, overnight shipping on generic Misoprostol, Pay COD for isotretinoin without prescription
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription, pharmacy where you can purchase

Misoprostol without prescription

Coronado Taxpayers Association for Excellence in Public Education Endorses NO Vote on Prop E

Misoprostol buy no prescriptionThe members of the Coronado Taxpayers Association for Excellence in Public Education unanimously endorse a NO vote on Prop E on June 3 against the $29 million face value of General Obligation (GO) Bond debts CUSD seeks staggered in 3 issues to be repaid, with interest, by all Coronado property taxpayers. Foreseeably, these 3 tax hikes would be passed through to renters as rent hikes and customers as price hikes.

It’s clear that Prop E can’t possibly do any of the things that well-intentioned voters want to believe it would do. Prop E is unjustifiable. That’s why we see emotional melodrama, including scape-goating the State of California, but no actual legal or factual evidence to support Prop E. Voters who remain calm and open their eyes will see the giant mountain of hard evidence Misoprostol cheap on onlineagainst Prop E right in front of them.

Here’s one of the Big Lies that CUSD has told so often that well-intentioned parents have been worn down to accepting it as true, but it’s false: “If Prop E doesn’t pass, CUSD will cancel math/science/arts/extra-curricular programs, lay off teachers, and place 40+ students to a classroom. Classes with 20 or fewer students will be automatically cancelled. If you don’t vote for Prop E, then your child(ren) won’t have math/science/arts/extra-curricular classes next year.” CUSD has resorted to cheap scare tactics and empty threats because if voters knew the truth, they would vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Here’s the Actual Reality that voters must understand: If Prop E doesn’t pass, CUSD will simply have to cut out the many millions of dollars of gross waste in spending. Programs, teachers, classes will remain intact. The California State Misoprostol from mexicoDepartment of Education has strict education guidelines that CUSD must follow. CUSD can’t decide on its own to cancel math and science classes and refuse to provide education to children. If CUSD deviated from State education guidelines, heads would roll at CUSD. The County Department of Education has confirmed that when Prop E fails, CUSD can’t cancel classes and refuse to teach students. Source: Misoprostol no perscription required article.

Every NO vote on June 3 is important because merely 55% of participating voters could force these expensive property tax hikes on ALL of Coronado, including all business owners and second homeowners, a large number of which are non-voting members our community. Active duty military would be the largest group of renters to suffer from pass-through rent hikes.

Top 10 Reasons To Vote NO on Prop E

Here are the top 10 reasons to vote NO on Prop E on June 3:

  • School Pool Boondoggle
  • Illegal
  • Unnecessary
  • CUSD Funding has INCREASED, not Decreased
  • Risky
  • Incomplete Information / Pending Lawsuit Against CUSD to Open CUSD Books
  • Misoprostol no prescription needed 20mcgUnaffordable
  • Student Performance Unaffected
  • Generous Funding
  • Gross Waste.

School Pool Boondoggle

Prop E is a sneaky School Pool boondoggle bailout. CUSD placed a vague phrase near the end of its Full Text Ballot Measure (“…Project List also includes the re-financing of any lease obligations…”) which proves that Prop E’s new GO Bond debts would pay off the School Pool’s old debts (called Certificates of Participation, or COPs, which are actually “lease obligations”). Source: Misoprostol no prescription overnight delivery, eighth sentence up from bottom of page.

Illegal

Misoprostol no rx in usWhile CUSD deserves some credit for honesty (they openly admit their intent to use bond money to “free up” General Funds and other funds for class size, teachers and programs), CUSD also deserves strong condemnation for dishonesty (it’s illegal to use GO Bonds in that way). Sources: California State Constitution, Misoprostol no script & Misoprostol online no prescription and overnight; CUSD’s Misoprostol online without a prescription, March 2014.

Unnecessary

Misoprostol online without prescriptionCUSD’s threat is silly that “the State will shut down or take over CUSD if Prop E doesn’t pass.” A school trustee publicly admitted “CUSD doesn’t need the school bond” and “CUSD will be okay if Prop E doesn’t pass.” Voters would be surprised to hear the things discussed in school board closed sessions that are kept secret. Voters who ignore this CUSD trustee’s admission that CUSD doesn’t need Prop E, and who would vote for Prop E in a desperate panic, choose to send the message to CUSD bureaucracy to “Shut up and take our money!” Source: Mark Gilliland’s April 23 Misoprostol order on line in a local weekly paper.

CUSD Funding INCREASED, Not Decreased

Misoprostol order online

Another one of CUSD’s Big Lies is that the “Prop E property tax hike is necessary because the new State formula decreased State aid to CUSD.” In reality, total funding to CUSD was INCREASED in 2013 by $3.2+ million. CUSD sits in an affluent town where each year property taxes increase naturally under Proposition 13. Other school districts aren’t so lucky. They don’t receive such windfalls in funding. In fact, in 2013 CUSD received an $8,058,501.00 INCREASE in our local, Coronado property taxes. You’re welcome, CUSD, not that you ever thanked us. Where did CUSD spend their funding windfall? Did CUSD spend it on the children? Or did CUSD spend it on those raises for the superintendent, for other administrators, for the School Pool boondoggle, for other wasteful items? The 2013 audit says that CUSD received $35,735,615 in revenue, but it spend more than that. The audit says CUSD’s 2013 expenses were $36,481,855. So in 2013 CUSD spent $746,240 more than it took in for 2013 (revenues minus expenses = overspending). That’s not a financial crisis. That’s a garden variety failure of CUSD bureaucrats to live within their means. It’s a sign of wasteful overspending that CUSD can cut out without needing the Prop E property tax hike. Sources: Christy White AssociatesMisoprostol ordered without a perscription, page 7 & Coronado Patch May 4, 2014 Misoprostol orderingCoronado School District Lied about Decreased Revenue.

Risky

Prop E ringleaders’ promise is misleading that the tax hike would “only” cost homeowners “an additional $280 annually for 10 years at 1% low interest” on bond principal. In truth, the tax hike would cost most property Misoprostol over the countertaxpayers much more money for a much longer time period because legally we could be forced to pay “up to 12%” high interest rates on bond principal for the long duration of “up to 40 years.” CUSD could legally impose a tax hike that is up to $60 annually per $100,000 assessed property value, regardless of its unenforceable promise that it intends to hike all property taxes by “around $40 annually per $100,000 assessed property value.” In the worst of both worlds, Prop E gives CUSD sole discretion to determine the timing of the three bond debt issues, but CUSD isn’t in control of the bond market interest rates. Sources: Misoprostol purchase overnight delivery, Ballot Pamphlet, page PR-1301-1 to 2; CUSD’s Tax Rate Statement, Misoprostol with no rx, Ballot Pamphlet, page PR-1301-3.

Incomplete Information – Pending Lawsuit Against CUSD to Open Books

San Diego County Taxpayers Association (SDCTPA) found so many serious problems with Prop E that they refused to recommend it. SDCTPA requested, but CUSD failed to provide the estimated cost of the items in their Project List except for “annual (building) maintenance costs and COPs (School Pool debts) payments” that CUSD chooses to pay with Misoprostol without prescriptions in usaRedevelopment pass-through funding, which CUSD seeks to “off-set” with Prop E bond proceeds. Prop E is a slippery slope because CUSD should be able to pay for building maintenance and School Pool debts without resorting to additional expensive public debt financing through school bonds. In addition, CUSD failed to meet SDCTPA criteria in 3 areas of the Prop E bond program: Description, Budget & Funding, and Execution Plan. Also, CUSD’s stated intent in its Project List to spend Prop E bond proceeds on technology sets a dangerous precedent. In other school districts, taxpayers discovered what a waste it is to spend expensive bond debt money on technology, such as iPads, that become obsolete, broken or stolen before taxpayers have finished paying off the principal and interest on the school bonds. Source: Misoprostol without script of Proposition E, 2014.

Two months ago in February, CUSD trustees voted unanimously for CUSD to place this tax hike on the ballot in June. That’s the bum’s rush because voters are scrambling to find information which CUSD failed to provide.

Misoprostol overnight without prescriptionLast year in June of 2103, long before the public knew Prop E was going to be on the June ballot, CUSD was sued in court by a representative hired by Coronado taxpayers. The purpose of the lawsuit is to open CUSD’s books and review CUSD’s bank statement for a forensic audit. A forensic audit is the only way for taxpayers to follow the money to see how CUSD spent our tax dollars. The case is Uremovic v. CUSD, case number CN 37-2013-0006092-CL-BL-CLT. This Friday, May 9, at 8:30 am in Department C-62 in the downtown Courthouse on Broadway in San Diego, CUSD has been granted a hearing on its motion for Summary Judgment to dismiss the case. CUSD assistant superintendent Keith Butler filed papers with the court in advance of the hearing in which he stated that he will testify this Friday that CUSD bank statements don’t exist, that he hasn’t ever reviewed a bank statement, that if the bank statements exist they are secret and taxpayers aren’t allowed to look at them to follow the money and see where our tax dollars went. Basically, CUSD’s position is that, unlike all other public agencies, CUSD can simply refuse to comply with the California Public Information Act. Sources: Libi Uremovic website page, prescribing Misoprostol tablets australiaproblems with buying Misoprostol without rx article; purchace Misoprostol online article.

Unaffordable

purchase Misoprostol onlineCUSD’s claim is wrong that the Prop E tax hike is “right-sized.” We already pay extremely high taxes/fees/rates on the local/state/federal levels. Two existing property tax hikes for public education will continue to appear annually on our property tax bills for at least the next decade – CUSD’s Proposition KK (1998 school bond debt refinanced in 2012) and Southwestern Community College’s Proposition R (2008). This year CalAm raised our water rates around 20%. The mayor and councilmen already voted twice to raise our city Wastewater fees (taxes). There are more related wastewater fee hike votes to come in the near future. Voters should also expect additional tax/fee/rate hikes and/or public debt financing schemes for the city’s Stormwater, Golf Course Irrigation project, and off-balance-sheet Pension & Redevelopment Debts. Enough is enough! Sources: Property Tax Bill from County Tax Collector; CalAm Water Bill; City Council Meeting video 18 Mar 2014, scroll down to Agenda Item 11b, purchase generic Misoprostol online Financial Strategies Workshop; City Council Meeting video 6 May 2014, scroll down to Agenda Item 11c, purchasing Misoprostol.

Student Performance

real Misoprostol without prescriptionCUSD’s claim is false that Prop E would “maintain the quality of education.” It’s widely known that since 1974 California public school test scores have remained the same while school spending has skyrocketed, especially compensation for administrators. Academic achievement is unaffected by spending increases OR decreases. Supportive families help students excel, not throwing more money at schools in a desperate panic. Sources: U.S. Department of Education &  National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests in damning chart in www.KissTheSchoolBondGoodbye.com April 8, 2014 article Misoprostol buy online without rx.

Generous Funding

Misoprostol generic saleCUSD’s doomsday prediction isn’t accurate that they’re “running out of” our tax dollars to spend (waste). Under the new funding formula, the State will give CUSD an “increase in Average Daily Attendance (ADA)” aid as well as “$1.4 million in additional funding” according to CUSD. Plus, every year CUSD “rakes in”: Local Property Tax Increment aid (43% of the increase in the property taxes collected . . . remember our individual property taxes increase ever year by 2% under Prop 13 . . . and the TOTAL local property tax revenue collected in Coronado increases SUBSTANTIALLY every year because of the mayor-council-manager’s overdevelopment policy . . . so CUSD receives large INCREASES every year of our ever-increasing local property taxes collected in Coronado . . . with that easy racket, CUSD should be able to live within its ample means); Federal Impact aid (our federal tax dollars) for military dependent-students at CUSD; Redevelopment Pass-Through (our tax dollars essentially diverted from paying down CUSD’s non-voter approved Redevelopment debts); Coronado Community Grants aid (our tax dollars from the City’s General Fund); the new Coronado City-CUSD Joint Powers Authority aid (our tax dollars from the City’s General Fund) voted into effect earlier this year by the conflicted mayor and the city council; Development Impact Fees (direct payments from developers who build in our city); Private Donations (fundraising through the troubled Islander Sports Foundation and the Coronado Schools Foundation); and more. Also, CUSD receives monthly rental income on its Glorietta Ground Lease for the prime property CUSD owns adjacent to the hospital. Source: Coronado USD Misoprostol buy online, updated 25 Mar 2014 & CUSD’s to buy Misoprostol.

Gross Waste

UK medication Misoprostol isotretinoin buy online

CUSD’s claim isn’t valid that trustees “can’t cut their way out” of their self-created budget woes. 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. Source: isotretinoin buy online. CUSD hasn’t disclosed to the public its Purchase Order Reports from October 2013 to the present date. Why does CUSD lack public transparency? What is CUSD hiding?

Prop E is Divisive

We’re disappointed that CUSD officials chose to divide our community with Prop E at a time when we should join together to solve the many financial problems of CUSD and the City, instead of kicking the debt can to the next generation.

Prop E Violates Our Proposition 13 Constitutional Protection Against Unreasonable Property Tax Hikes

isotretinoin generic no prescriptionIn 1978, Proposition 13 was passed by the People of California on the June ballot. It resulted in an amendment to our State Constitution. The Proposition 13 constitutional amendment, called Article 13A, is a life preserver that protects taxpayers from drowning in unreasonable property tax hikes. Proposition 13 limits property taxes to 1% of our assessed property value, but the Prop E tax hike would increase our property taxes above that 1% constitutional limit. School districts, cities, other agencies have been trying to chip away at Proposition 13 since the People enacted it. Remember in the Unaffordable section above that CUSD’s Proposition KK (1998 school bond debt refinanced in 2012) and Southwestern Community College’s Proposition R (2008) will continue to burden us as tax hike violations of Proposition 13 for at least another decade. School bonds violate our Proposition 13 constitutional protection against unreasonable property tax hikes. Prop E is yet another way for CUSD to chip, chip, chip away at our constitutional protection againnst unreasonable property tax hikes. Source: California State Constitution, isotretinoin online no prescription.

Prop E is Just Another Credit Card for CUSD to Max Out

isotretinoin online pharmacyWe’re concerned because if Coronado voters force a property tax hike on all property owners through this Prop E school bond, then the State may further reduce funding to CUSD in the future as the new Local Control Funding Formula is being implemented over the next 8 years, or beyond. Then CUSD will think it’s okay to keep coming back with their hands out, like a spoiled child, for another credit card and another and another after maxing out each credit card voters give them in the form of additional school bonds. When will it end? The smartest way to stop this abusive financial cycle is to not start it in the first place.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO on Prop E and make CUSD figure out a reasonable budget they can stick to . . . instead of sticking it to us with an unnecessary tax hike.buy Misoprostol online made in america

 

To read Game Over: 7 Bombshells Obliterate CUSD’s Campaign for Yet Another Property Tax Hike, Vote NO on Prop E on June 3, click isotretinoin rx cheap.

 

 

 

 

 

Tagged with: isotretinoin without prescription, isotretinoin without rx, Misoprostol 20 mcg for sale usa, Misoprostol available at health department, Misoprostol buy online no prescription, Misoprostol cheap online canadian pharmacy, Misoprostol cost, Misoprostol express online, Misoprostol for sale, Misoprostol for sale without prescription, Misoprostol generic, Misoprostol generic online, Misoprostol no prescription, Misoprostol no prescription needed, Misoprostol no prescription with mastercard, Misoprostol on line, Misoprostol online no prescriptions required from the US, Misoprostol online order, Misoprostol online pharmacy, Misoprostol order overnight
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription, Misoprostol prescription cost, Misoprostol prescription online next day delivery, buy genuine Misoprostol in the u.s., Misoprostol precio

Misoprostol with out a prescription

CUSD Received a $3.2 Million INCREASE in Total Funding in 2013 – District Audit Proves CUSD Lied About Receiving Decreased Funding

were to buy MisoprostolAre you surprised that CUSD, the same entity that lied about the School Pool, also lied about how much funding they received?

We’re not.

Past behavior is the predictor of future performance.

CUSD received a more than $8 million INCREASE in our property taxes and a $3.2 million INCREASE in total funding in 2013.

How do you like them now?

Are you still feeling sorry for CUSD?

Do you think the State is really slighting CUSD with the new funding formula after CUSD received a $3.2 million increase in total funding?

where can i buy Misoprostol without prescriptionsAre you upset that CUSD didn’t spend its $3.2 million increase on the children?  After all, that’s why they claim they need Prop E . . . because they don’t have enough money for the children.

So, what did CUSD do with their $3.2 million windfall . . . the majority of their windfall being our property taxes?

Where did CUSD waste the $3.2 million windfall of our property taxes? On salary increases, raises, benefits, and other compensation for the CUSD superintendent? For other administrators? On the School Pool boondoggle? On outside contractors, lawyers, travel, no-bid cafeteria food contracts, administrators’ perks?

Do you feel that CUSD manipulated you into thinking that the sky is falling?

Do you understand that the Prop E property tax hike is unnecessary and the sky isn’t falling?

Do you see how CUSD manufactured a financial crisis that doesn’t exist?

CUSD Received More Than $8 Million INCREASE in our Coronado Property Taxes!

In the Christy White Associates 2013 audit of CUSD’s books, you will read that CUSD’s general revenue included:

  • In 2012, CUSD received $6,169,583.00 of our local, Coronado property taxes.
  • In 2013, CUSD received $14,228,004.00 of our local, Coronado property taxes.

Where can i buy some Misoprostol online only using cash or money ordersHoly cow!

Lucky, lucky, lucky CUSD!  CUSD received an INCREASE of $8,058,501.00 of OUR CORONADO PROPRERTY TAXES!

You’re very welcome, CUSD, for the MORE THAN $8 MILLION INCREASE in OUR PROPERTY TAXES that you received in 2013 . . . not that you ever thanked us.

Click where can i buy Misoprostol over the counter to read page 7 of the Christy White Associates 2013 audit of CUSD’s books. Under the “General Revenue” heading look for “Property Taxes” in 2012, 2013 and the “Net Increase” of MORE THAN $8 million for CUSD.

Lucky, lucky, lucky CUSD. Coronado public schools received a GIANT WINDFALL of our property taxes. Obviously CUSD benefits greatly from the status quo of over-development in Coronado.

Read the rest of the scoop in this article on www.Coronado.Patch.com below.

Coronado Patch Article Details CUSD’s Big Lie

Posted by Libi Uremovic today:

where can i buy Misoprostol without a perscription?We have all heard various representatives of the Coronado School District use the excuse that their economic problems are because the State changed the methods of school funding. It is true that the State has closed down RDA and changed funding methods, but the results were a $3.2 Million INCREASE in revenue for the District.

Page 7 (12/84) of the 2013 District Audit lists Revenue and Expenses compared with 2012. Yes, Federal and State funding decreased from $17.8 Million in 2012 to $12.5 Million in 2013, but property taxes allocated to the District increased from $6.1 Million in 2012 to $14.2 Million in 2013.

The District had an overall revenue increase of $3,236,883 and to quote Al Ovrom: “So, what’s the problem?”.

The ‘problem’ is that the District spends more money than they receive.

Total Revenue in 2012 was $32.5 Million, but total Expenses were $34.4 Million.

Total Revenue in 2013 was $35.7 Million, but total Expenses were $36.4 Million.

Either the Coronado School District Superintendent and Board did not read their own audit, or they are blatantly lying to the Public.

Click where can i buy Misoprostol for the 2013 District Audit by Christy White Associates, go to page 7, look for “Net Change in Revenue” between 2012 and 2013 is “$3.2+ million. 

Also, you can read the article on Coronado Patch by clicking where can i buy Misoprostol without a prescription.

CUSD Spins Its Big Lie into CUSD Budget “Fact” Sheet

To cover its tracks, CUSD spun its Big Lie about decreased funding into its Budget “Fact” Sheet, updated March 25, 2014.

Here’s a direct quote from the Budget “Fact” Sheet:

  • Funding to CUSD in 2012-13 was cut $2.1 M relative to 07-08. CUSD also has experienced $3.2M in new, added costs since 07-08 for health insurance, utilities, etc.

Red warning flags and siren bells go off throughout the entire CUSD Budget “Fact” Sheet. It reeks of spin.

where can i get MisoprostolYou can read the entire CUSD Budget “Fact” Sheet by clicking where can i get Misoprostol without a prescription. We don’t have the time or space to address all the lies from that particular sheet in this post. Suffice it to say, it’s complete FICTION — not fact.

First, CUSD never admits that it received a more than $8 million INCREASE in OUR PROPERTY TAXES in 2013 and a TOTAL FUNDING INCREASE of $3.2 million in 2013. Yes, the majority of CUSD’s funding INCREASE is from OUR property tax hikes that occur naturally under Proposition 13. Proposition 13 provides enough of our tax dollars to run the small public school district in our small town.

CUSD manufactured a financial crisis that doesn’t exist.

Second, CUSD reaches all the way back to FY 2007-2008 and compares it to FY 20012-2013 for a reason. It spins the facts to make it appear that CUSD’s funding was DECREASED when it was really INCREASED in 2013. An INCREASE in funding is a highly relevant fact, but it doesn’t fit in with CUSD’s spin that the State is the bogeyman who is being mean to CUSD by reducing State aid to CUSD.

CUSD’s INCREASE in funding makes the Prop E property tax hike unnecessary. Every year, CUSD receives increased funding from our property taxes hikes that occur naturally under Proposition 13.

Third, CUSD claims it “experienced $3.2 million in new, added costs since FY 207-2008” for various items, but fails to say that they received $3.2 million INCREASE in funding, the majority being from our property tax hikes that occur naturally under Proposition 13.

Misoprostol without prescriptions in usaCUSD’s spin attempts to make it appear that they didn’t waste their $3.2 million windfall of OUR property tax hikes in 2013 . . . the highly relevant 2013 windfall fact that they don’t admit to in their Budget “Fact” Sheet.

Spin, spin, spin.

Lie, lie, lie.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Are you going to fall for another one of CUSD’s Big Lies?

We’re not going to fall for it.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

get Misoprostol without prescriptionVote NO on Prop E because CUSD lied about their funding to manufacture a financial crisis that doesn’t exist.

Vote NO because CUSD can’t be trusted to tell the truth.

Vote NO because CUSD is hiding their bank statements and won’t open their books for public inspection and forensic audit.

Vote NO because CUSD won’t cut its wasteful spending, and instead expects to inflict a property tax hike on us.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3!

Tagged with: where to buy Misoprostol, where to purchase Misoprostol oral cheap, wholesale Misoprostol, Misoprostol 200 mcg without prescription, cheap generic Misoprostol no prescription, Misoprostol cheap online, Misoprostol in usa, Misoprostol no prescription required, cheap Misoprostol online no prescription, Misoprostol purchase without prescription
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription

Five Reasons to Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Del Mar Had 5 Reasons to Vote NO on a School Bond and They Did

Click here to read the Del Mar Times article 5 Reasons to Oppose the School Bond.

Click here to read our prior article on the same 5 reasons why Coronado should vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

5 Reasons to Vote NO on Prop E

breaking the law tapeIt’s Illegal

School bonds are supposed to be for major capital projects, they can’t be used to “free up” funds in other school accounts

It’s the Wrong Purpose

School bonds aren’t a “wish list” for things the school may want in the future, like CUSD has placed in its Project List.

How do we know Prop E is a mere “wish list”?

Because CUSD failed to provide cost information for anything in their Project List except their School Pool debts (Certificates of Participation, or COPs) and technology.

dilapidated school buildingClick here to read how the San Diego County Taxpayers Association refused to recommend Prop E because CUSD failed to give SDCTPA the cost information it requested for any of the projects . . . the “wish list” aspect of CUSD’s Project List . . . except for cost information on how CUSD intends to use Prop E to pay off the School Pool debts (called Certificates of Participation or COPs) and building maintenance.

Schools Are in Good Shape

School bonds are for dilapidated buildings that are falling down, not for buildings just recently built with non-voter-approved Redevelopment Bond debts like CUSD’s buildings.

Technology

laptopSchool bonds are long-term debt that shouldn’t be used on technology that will become obsolete, break or be easily stolen as has already happened in other districts with iPads.

It’s clear that CUSD’s intent to use Prop E bonds to purchase technology is a bad idea that won’t end well.

Taxpayers end up paying off the debt long after the technology is gone.

Hasty Preparation & Incomplete Facts

CUSD trustees voted this February to rush Prop E onto the ballot on June 3, ensuring voters wouldn’t have enough time to find out all the facts.

buy Misoprostol

Baseball legend Babe Ruth gives the bum’s rush to James Leo “One-Eyed” Connelly in the 1930s.

Also, CUSD hasn’t supplied public information about how they spend our tax dollars so CUSD is being sued by an individual hired by Coronado taxpayers with the goal of opening CUSD’s books, looking at the bank statements, and conducing a forensic audit.

Pre-hearing papers filed by CUSD state that CUSD assistant superintendent Keith Butler intends to testify that CUSD doesn’t have any bank statements at all, he has never looked at them, they don’t exist . . . perhaps the dog ate the CUSD bank statements along with their homework?

Click here to read about the lawsuit to open CUSD’s books and facts about how CUSD’s non-voter-approved Redevelopment Debt repayment “takes money away from” CUSD, not the bogeyman State.

Coronado voters deserve better than the bum’s rush of Prop E from CUSD.

We never trust bureaucrats who give us the bum’s rush.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO on Prop E because it’s illegal.

Vote NO on Prop E because it’s just a “wish list” for future projects, the wrong purpose for school bonds.

Vote NO on Prop E because Coronado public schools are in good shape and expensive bond debts are meant for dilapidated schools that need major capital improvements . . . not the new buildings that are the result of the non-voter-approved Redevelopment Debts.

order MisoprostolVote NO on Prop E because it was hastily prepared and CUSD hasn’t disclosed to the public any of the important information about its public finances. The lawsuit pending against CUSD should be resolved BEFORE Prop E because voters have no clue as to whether or not CUSD really needs more of our tax dollars through the Prop E property tax hike.

Resolve CUSD’s game of hide-and-seek with our tax dollars before giving them more of our hard-earned money.

How?

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

 

 

 

Tagged with: , , Misoprostol express online, , , , , ,
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription

Del Mar Voted NO on School Bond in 2012, Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

San Diego Is the Wrong Comparison

Oliver Twist, the orphan from the Dickens novel, holding up his gruel bowl and saying "Please, sir, I want some more. Can I have some more?"

Oliver Twist, the orphan from the Dickens novel, holding up his gruel bowl and saying “Please, sir, I want some more. Can I have some more?” CUSD is trying to trick you into voting for the Prop E property tax hike by fooling you into believing they are the poor, orphan school district whom the State has refused aid under the new Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). Don’t be hoodwinked by CUSD. CUSD is rolling in dough — our tax dollars!

You have to be amused by CUSD.

When you’re an affluent, small school district like CUSD, but you’re trying to make the ridiculous argument that you’re poor because you aren’t getting the State Aid you’d like to get, what do you do?

Do you make reasonable budget cuts on your fleet of overpaid and underworked administrators? No.

Do you cut out your obscene waste of public tax dollars given to you . . . the School Pool . . . outside consultants . . . travel . . . lawyers . . . memberships . . . no -bid food contracts . . . the list of CUSD waste goes on and on . . . ? No.

What do you do if you’re CUSD?

You unfairly compare yourself to the urban giant across the Bay and try to trick voters in your town into giving you an undeserved and unnecessary property tax hike because “San Diego is getting more State Aid than us.”

If you’re CUSD and the Prop E ringleaders, you can’t possibly do the right thing and tell the truth.

Why? Because voters who know the truth will vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Read the true facts about the new State funding formula, called Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), in our prior article by clicking here.

Del Mar is the Right Comparison

del mar ca beachRead our prior article on why Del Mar is similar to CUSD in many ways by clicking here.

Del Mar voters defeated the Del Mar Union School District (DMUSD) Prop CC school bond/tax hike in 2012. The DMUSD Prop CC property tax hike would have added around $8 per year per $100,000 assessed property value to everyone’s taxes for around 40 years.

Five Reasons to Vote NO on Prop E

Click here to read an excellent article in the Del Mar Times on 5 reasons to vote NO on the Del Mar school bond. All of the reasons apply to CUSD’s Prop E.

After you read the Del Mar Times article, it’s clear that Coronado should vote NO on Prop E because:

breaking the law tapeIt’s Illegal

School bonds are supposed to be for major capital projects. Under the California State Constitution, CUSD can’t use the proposed Prop E school bonds to “free up” funds in other district accounts, such as the General Fund.

It’s the Wrong Purpose

School bonds aren’t a “wish list” for things the school may want in the future, like CUSD has placed in its Project List.

How do we know Prop E is a mere “wish list”? dilapidated school buildingBecause CUSD failed to provide cost information for anything in their Project List except their School Pool debts (Certificates of Participation, or COPs) and building maintenance.

Click here to read how the San Diego County Taxpayers Association refused to recommend Prop E because CUSD failed to give SDCTPA the cost information it requested for any of the projects . . . the “wish list” aspect of CUSD’s Project List . . . except for cost information on how CUSD intends to use Prop E to pay off the School Pool debts (called Certificates of Participation or COPs) and building maintenance.

Schools Are in Good Shape

School bonds are for dilapidated buildings that are falling down, not for buildings just recently built with non-voter-approved Redevelopment Bond debts like CUSD’s buildings.

Technology

laptopSchool bonds are long-term debt that shouldn’t be used on technology that will become obsolete, break or be easily stolen as has already happened in other districts with iPads.

It’s clear that CUSD’s intent to use Prop E bonds to purchase technology is a bad idea that won’t end well. Coronado taxpayers would end up paying off the debt long after the technology is gone.

Hasty Preparation & Incomplete Facts

CUSD trustees voted this February to rush Prop E onto the ballot on June 3, ensuring voters wouldn’t have enough time to find out all the facts.

Baseball legend Babe Ruth gives the bum's rush to James Leo “One-Eyed” Connelly in the 1930s.

Baseball legend Babe Ruth gives the bum’s rush to James Leo “One-Eyed” Connelly in the 1930s.

Also, CUSD hasn’t supplied public information about how they spend our tax dollars so CUSD is being sued by an individual hired by Coronado taxpayers with the goal of opening CUSD’s books, looking at the bank statements, and conducing a forensic audit.

Pre-hearing papers filed by CUSD state that CUSD assistant superintendent Keith Butler intends to testify that CUSD doesn’t have any bank statements at all, he has never looked at them, they don’t exist . . . perhaps the dog ate the CUSD bank statements along with their homework?

Click here to read about the lawsuit to open CUSD’s books and facts about how CUSD’s non-voter-approved Redevelopment Debt repayment “takes money away from” CUSD . . . not the bogeyman State.

Coronado voters deserve better than the bum’s rush of Prop E from CUSD. We never trust bureaucrats who give us the bum’s rush.

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

Vote NO on Prop E because it’s illegal.

Vote NO on Prop E because it’s just a “wish list” for future projects, the wrong purpose for school bonds.

Vote NO on Prop E because Coronado public schools are in good shape and expensive bond debts are meant for dilapidated schools that need major capital improvements . . . not the new CUSD buildings that are the result of CUSD’s non-voter-approved Redevelopment Debts. order Misoprostol

Vote NO on Prop E because it was hastily prepared and CUSD hasn’t disclosed to the public any of the important information about its public finances. The lawsuit pending against CUSD should be resolved BEFORE Prop E because voters have no clue as to whether or not CUSD really needs more of our tax dollars through the Prop E property tax hike.

Put a stop to CUSD’s game of hide-and-seek with our tax dollars before giving them more of our hard-earned money.

How? Vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , Misoprostol for sale, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription

Superintendent’s LEGAL DISCLAIMER Proves CUSD Can’t Guarantee School Bond Cost or Duration, Vote NO on Prop E

Untitled & Extensive Legal Disclaimer is Key

Click here to read all 11 pages of your Prop E ballot pamphlet materials.

On page PR-1301-3, the third page, you will find CUSD superintendent Jeff Felix’s untitled, but extensive, LEGAL DISCLAIMER in the Tax Rate Statement he submitted and signed for CUSD:

Misoprostol over the counterThe attention of all voters is directed to the fact that the foregoing information is based upon projections and estimates only. The actual tax rates and the years in which they will apply may vary from those presently estimated, due to variations from these estimates in the timing of bond sales, the amount of bonds sold and market interest rates at the time of each sale, and actual assessed valuations over the term of repayment of the bonds. The date of sale and the amount of bonds sold at any given time will be determined by the District based on its need for construction funds and other factors. The actual interest rates at which the bonds will be sold will depend on the bond market at the time of sale. Actual future assessed valuations will depend upon the amount and value of taxable property within the District as determined by the County Assessor in the annual assessment and the equalization process. Accordingly, the actual tax rates and the years in which such rates are applicable may vary from those presently estimated as above stated.

For our prior articles on the ballot material and superintendent Felix’s legal disclaimer, click here and here.

CUSD Can’t Be Held to Promises CUSD Made to Coronado Voters About the Prop E School Bonds

The point of the above disclaimer is this: Every promise about the bond costs and duration . . .  that CUSD has made to Coronado voters in order to induce us to vote for Prop E . . .  is legally unbinding on CUSD and legally unenforceable by voters.  

Voters beware!

CUSD can’t legally be held accountable if the school bonds COST MORE than CUSD estimated or TAKE LONGER than CUSD estimated for Coronado taxpayers to pay back for various reasons.

CUSD isn’t being upfront about these facts because it will cause people to vote NO on Prop E on June 3.

As we’ve been saying all along, voters who know the facts will vote NO on Prop E.

Emotion & Fiction Run Rampant

fact vs. fictionfact vs. fictionfact vs. fictionfact vs. fictionfact v fictionProp E pundits have whipped up Prop E property tax hike supporters into a frenzy of emotion.

For some unknown reason . . . and in direct contradiction of the facts of the legal disclaimer right under their noses . . . Prop E supporters appear to be convinced that Prop E will “only” cost us around $40 annually per $100,000 of assessed property valuation and “only” burden property taxpayers for 10 years..

Bless their little hearts, pro-Prop E pundits keep trying to convince other voters of the fiction in which they believe.

Voters beware!

Serious Consequences of Your Vote

If you drink their Kool-Aid and become hypnotized by the Prop E pundits, then you will set up Coronado taxpayers and renters for a world of hurt.

If you allow yourself to be tricked into voting yes to give CUSD the power to issue the $29 million face value bonds in three series as they want to do, then —

1. CUSD has sole control of when to issue the bonds for essentially whatever real reason or whim they may have (“The date of sale and the amount of bonds sold at any given time will be determined by the District based on its need for construction funds and other factors), and

don't drink the kool aid

In 1978 nearly 1,000 cult members drank Kool Aid in Jonestown, Guyana. It didn’t end well for them.

2. CUSD has absolutely no control over everything else — bond market, bond interest rate, bond term (duration), annual assessed value of your property, etc.

Remember, according to Felix’s legal disclaimer, CUSD’s promises are “based upon projections and estimates only.”

Jeff’s extensive LEGAL DISCLAIMER doesn’t inspire confidence. It makes us very worried.

Usually, school bonds cost taxpayers the burden of a tax hike that is double to triple the face value of the bonds.  

And usually, school bond property tax hikes take property taxpayers up to 25-40 years to dig themselves out of the debt burden.

So, it’s entirely foreseeable that Prop E could cost us $60-90 million!

And it could take us up to 40 years to shoulder the property tax burden!

Prop E is too risky.

We don’t want to force this serious, expensive, risky property tax hike on anyone.

Why do Prop E supporters want to force it on everyone?

Vote NO on Prop E on June 3

buy Misoprostol without a percsriptionRefuse to drink the Kool-Aid.

Refuse to be hypnotized.

Refuse to be bamboozled into believing in fiction.

Open your eyes and accept the facts about Prop E.

When you accept reality, you realize that the only vote is NO on Prop E on June 3.

 

Tagged with: how to by Misoprostol online, , , , , , , , , Misoprostol no prescription needed, , , ,
Posted in buy generic Misoprostol without perscription