I can see where the schools were coming from ( to protect privacy and safety) but you are right, the more sun that shines in, the better.

I really like the idea the police must release their logs. How else can you tell if a neighborhood you are about to buy in is really safe?

Tim,
I've spoken to several people mentioned in the Star article. They have different views of the story and feel the article was very slanted. I think the Star should do a follow up article and let the people they quoted defend themselves. Government agencies do have 10 days to respond and clerks do not have to disrupt their work to find something that may not be at hand, or something they may not know about and will have to do some research for. In terms of safety in a secretary hands something over that has an address in it, and some wacko then goes and kills someone, will the secretary be sued?

Oops, meant to say "if a secretary". I do agree Tim that we need 100% transparent government, but at the same time don't you agree we need to provide some degree of security for public employees in this day and age?

Arleigh,

Anyone that was misquoted or thought the article was slanted can use this e-mail address:

letters@venturacountystar.com

As for security, yes, the agencies have the responsibility to protect their staff and the public. At the same time, the public has a right to the records. It's a balancing act for sure - but in most of these cases, the information was simply denied.

Tim

One of the best ways to make these requests less burdensome on government is to put it all on the internet. Sure, we should protect employees, but posting the budget and other documents on the internet enables local government to spend less time answering Public Records requests and more time doing more productive work within their respective agencies.

The key to government accountability is an informed citizenry. If the information is not available then government is unaccountable to the people.

We need to ensure the public has the ability to access the information needed to form educated opinions.

Scott,

That's a salient point. Private industry seems to be able to track packages and the movement of goods from point A to point b using bar code labeling and many other technologies. Government on the other hand, can;t seem to come up with an efficient way to post a janitorial contract, Office Depot invoices or bond expenditures (sorry - couldn't resist).

We should take government out of the services they are incapable of performing. Why are school districts in the property management and food services business when they should be in the education business?

The technology exists to create operational efficiencies and open records... isn't it time to use it?

Tim:

I agree to a certain extent on your argument for better operational efficiencies using technology. However, from my experience in business, when we've upgraded technology it seems to grow the workforce (expenses) at the tech level. That is, the computer system needs constant upkeep and maintenance and training systems for the employees.

The key goal has to be to acquire technology that will realize savings and improve operational capability without creating new unintended expenses. That always seems to be a tougher nut to crack.

In terms of real estate or property management, I grow concerned not when districts have too many assets or two few assets, but rather do they have the assets that enhance cash position? That is, when assets undermine any organization's cash situation we need to dispose of them. When they provide benefits, we should keep them.

I attended the a property discussion at SVUSD, which was very interesting to listen to. Essentially, the property being presented completed a cost/benefit analysis. The one analysis I'd like to see is what the rate of return on those fixed assets we were seeing that included the value of a dollar over time.

That is, can we dispense of property with a low return and invest the money in something else that has a higher rate of return? To me, this would enhance the district's cash position although, I believe those dollars are highly restricted.

I welcome ideas as always...

Scott,

Many CEO's know that they must focus their business on their core competencies. In public education today, most superintendents and board members are educators first. They should focus on their agency's core competency, which in many districts is educating kids (not so much in others, but I digress).

In other words, if they need technological advancements and investments to make their operations more efficient, thus providing better service to kids, and transparency and accountability to taxpayers, they should do the following:

1. Develop a long range plan for technology investments, including database driven web sites, constantly updated network infrastucture and equipment
2. Develop a plan to manage these investments through a long-range outsourced solution
3. Go to the taxpayers for bond funds to accomplish these goals.

Too often taxpayers are asked to invest in "technology". What does that mean? I don't subscribe to the theory that investing in systems and infrastructure has to mean additional paid personnel, benefits and the like.

I think taxpayers would invest in a well thought out long range plan. Heck, most of the time, taxpayers invest in far less well thought out plans.

Tim

Tim:

I'm surprised that you support further bond initiatives and subsequent property tax increases for your proposal with what you have said about C4.

Are you implying that if property taxes were higher than more people would get involved in local education?

It is becoming more clear at the state level, we will most likely be faced with an increase in the state income tax if certain members win the Governor's race. Combine this with an an additional assesment at the local level and many, many people who are already classified as the highest taxed group in a state by state analysis will be faced with additional taxes.

Do you agree we should be faced with higher income taxes and higher property taxes than we are already facing?

Arleigh: I see Angelides got the CTA endorsement. Does he plan to increase income taxes if elected Governor?

Tim

I would much rather look at ways to get rid of waste and fraud, than ask taxpayers to fork out more money in taxes.

Scott

Scott,

Did you see my post on the Royal high choir successes. Great job those kids and teachers are doing over there.

Now, where do you get off saying I support raising taxes (though the electorate in most parts of the country has demostrated they support higher tax rates in return for noticeable services (but again, I digress)...

C4 is an excellent example of my point. That $145 Bond measure really should have been 3-4 seperate bond measures that would have raised the same amount of money, raised the same % of the tax rate, but provided significantly more accountability to the taxpayer - read it AND WEEP:

BOND 1 = New Classrooms and modernization
BOND 2 = Technology infrastruture plan, implementation and outsourcing of management
Bond 3 = Weight Rooms, Pools, Running tracks and performing arts centers, paid for through usage fees
Bond 4 = Libraries & Related materials

Total = $145 million

If you notice, C4 was one big bundle of all of this, and did anyone notice how hard it is to put a finger on how much of any of this is going to happen?

ALSO - What about debt refinancing? Many public agencies pay off old debt before taking on new. This gets you new dollars while retiring old tax increases. I don't see much of that 'round here.

Thanks Scott - But I think we need to be more creative with the taxpayer's dollars before AND after we ask them for more money.

Tim

Tim:

On C4, you supported C4 in it's current form not the new one you propose now where we break it into four proposals. Has your position evolved or was your support a compromise of "well some money is better than nothing."?

My point about tax increases is that your position to have technology bonds does not take into account the current labrynth of our state and local tax system.

Why should a property owner vote for higher taxes when they do not know what other tax increases they might be facing in other parts of their lives?

We are lacking two things right now more than anything in public administration. First, we lack intergovernmental relations big time. Pieces of government don't even talk to each other. Second, we seem to lack an effective implementation strategy in government.

We have multiple levels of government all adopting different tax and fee increase proposals and before we know it, we the people have no money left and the taxing agencies are too large and unresponsive to meet the needs of the citizens.

Take a look at the Department of Homeland Security as big government growing increasingly unresponsive to all it is required to do? FEMA became part of Homeland security as a "creative" proposal losing it's seat at the table in budget negotiation and homeland security coordination efforts.

So, Katrina hits and FEMA is unable to coordinate an effective federal response. Homeland security commands a huge budget, but I seem to remember FEMA being much better equipped prior to the Homeland Security Act to meet the needs of the people during times of crisis.

Your proposal for more bonds and property taxes inherently grows the size of local government, does it not?

Give me an example of one bond in the state of California that has made an organization leaner and more responsive to the people?

C4 has grown the size of local government, has it not?

I think government can only become more creative when it is lean. I don't see how giving more and more money to agencies makes them more efficient... Enlighten me?

Scott

Scott,
Why do you think Sacramento republicans left Arnold out in the cold on the public works bonds he wanted? The L.A. Times said Arnold had a deal worked out, dems supported it, but republicans blocked it. Do they not want him re-elected? Reading the paper today it also looks like republicans nationally are imploding. Bush only has approval ratings of 37%, Nixon territory! They say white males are the main group walking away from the Bush, why do you think that is? Also why do you think so many local republicans like Steve Frank are attacking Tenenbaum? This is America, doesn't he have the right to run? The papers make it sound like whatever Gallegly orders that all county republicans will do it like un-thinking robots, is that true?

Hi Arleigh:

Did I get you and Tim on the same side of an issue?

I'd answer all your questions, but I have to get my marching orders first... We have a few more secret meetings with the executives before we'll answer... :) Just kidding.

Do you happen to know of any bond that has improved operating efficiency within any agency? When I get off tonight, I'm going to try and find one?

Tim put out an idea of a technology bond to improve efficiency and I naturally always question the wisdom of bonds because two things we know for sure and the third always seems to be the big "if". 1) Property taxes go up. 2) Our public agency goes into debt 3) You may or may not get all the things we passed the bond for....

To me, A bond is like the forward pass in football. Someone once remarked, when you pass in football three things can happen and only one of them is good...

I also see increased property assesments as yet another cost on affordable housing for middle income people. When people pass bond after bond, it makes homes more unaffordable.

I remember my wife and me putting together every last cent we had and putting it toward a home in Simi. It's a pretty scary feeling when you get your first property tax bill. Then, a couple of weeks later, you get something called the supplemental to make up for the new assessed value.

Obviously, we planned way ahead so we were fine, but should property taxes be this abusive?

I think politicians on both sides need to show much more defference and respect to the feeling of the people forking out the money.

We are kind of tired of putting up more of our own money so some guy in in another part of the state has a new road to drive on. Meanwhile, I'm stuck on the 23.

Scott

Sorry I can't resist... Remember, the Department of Homeland Security I mentioned previsouly...

Here is the result of big government as the answer from MSNBC...

"Airline screeners fail government bomb tests"

***21 airports nationwide don't detect bomb-making materials***

Here is the next question... If private companies ran security that failed on 9/11 and the government is failing now... Who do we turn to now to improve airport security?

Scott

NCLB Blogger:

Sorry that I don't post often enough for you, I know you value my "input".

You and another blog person asked me for my top ten:

1. Public schools offer a wide variety of choices in activities and courses.

2. Public schools stand up for students of many backgrounds including different economic groups.

3. The PTA continues to front for the communist movement. I am jesting. I appreciate the work they do.

4. Booster clubs in Simi Valley working hard.

5. Simi Valley Education Foundation raising major capital.

6. A school board that disagrees with each other. If they all agreed we could reduce it to one member.

7. Taco night at Del Taco. Not really related to education but I like tacos.

8. The many local tutoring programs I see advertisted in The Acorn. That means our community is valuing education.

9. The dedicated staff in the Valley View front office. Go Vikings!

10. Our own version of a charter school, Santa Susana. Simi Valley contiues to innovate.

I noticed your list included many national or state trends. What is your top ten local uplifitng education stories? Please share.

Mr. NCLB blogger Mr. Jerre Mr. Blough Mr. Kid Mr. Chamilton will you share your top ten local education lists?

Jerre,
I read your op-ed piece in the Star today. I'm flattered that you are so obssesed with me, even more so then Chris H. But I really think you should work on getting a life at some point. I was surprised the Star printed something so devoid of facts and filled with distortions.

To be fair, here is the unedited op-ed that Arleigh is referring to, penned by Jerre Reimers:

Ventura County Star

To print this page, select File then Print from your browser
URL: http://www.venturacountystar.com/vcs/opinion/article/0,1375,VCS_125_4548326,00.html
Schools should pay teachers for value
By Jerre Reimers
March 17, 2006

Re: Arleigh Kidd's Feb. 28 letter, "How to add teachers":

Kidd offered several ideas on attracting new teachers.

He called for the governor to reinstate the Teacher Retention Tax Credit. While this tax credit is valuable to current teachers, I don't think it has much value in attracting new teachers. I would like to see data on how many people entered a credential program based upon expecting to receive a tax credit.

He called for cities to follow Agoura's lead and help new teachers buy a first home. Several things bother me about this. Teaching is one of the most important professions that I know. Teachers are a vital component of any local community. But so are policemen, firefighters, city employees, healthcare professionals, retail workers, those involved in the national defense, etc. No community can exist without these folks. Where do we draw the line in helping these people buy their first home? And how should this program be financed? In actual fact, Agoura's program is open to all individuals who live in the city, though public-service employees qualify for a higher level of assistance.

Kidd asks that our assemblyman stop trying to undermine the State Teachers Retirement System. I believe Assemblyman Keith Richman is trying to fix the state defined-benefit pension plans so the state does not go bankrupt trying to fund it. CalSTRS has a deficit of more than $20 billion and the state is floating a $900 million pension obligation bond to help cover its debts. The only source of on-going money is the taxpayers. This is not sustainable in the long run. State employees must accept the same type of retirement plan that are provided to nongovernment workers, i.e. a 401(k)-style program. Under Richman's plan, current retirees are protected. That's a better guarantee than what any private sector retiree has.

Kidd suggested the Social Security offset be eliminated. Of the many reasons people don't become teachers in a second career, I don't think the Social Security offset has much to do with it.

Finally, Kidd wants more funding for the state education system, but he doesn't explain how more funding would be used or how more funding would improve the education results.

There does not appear to be a shortage of teachers statewide. Only 3.5 percent are teaching on an emergency credential (Ed-Data). Declaring there is a shortage vastly overstates the issue.

The answer to attracting and retaining teachers lies in the private sector — pay for value. The teachers' union would have people believe individual teachers are interchangeable. The teachers' union would have people believe these teachers have exactly the same outcome with their students. Hence, the union believes teachers should be paid based on years of experience. That's really hard to justify. Parents know full well that some teachers are better than others. Supply and demand set the wage scale. If math and science teachers are harder to come by, then it would be necessary to pay more. Great teachers should earn more than average teachers.

Some who choose teaching as a second career have a much experience that would benefit the students, yet, because of the pay scale, these qualified individuals must come in at the bottom of the pay scale. Getting rid of the pay scale based on years of experience will attract more teachers.

Tim,
You can read my full response to Jerre on the Star Editorial page in the next week or two (Hopefully they will publish it sooner than later). Also, wasn't the original topic here the Star story on their sunshine week investigation? Did you read the story in the Star today on the secretary who said that in fact, the Star story was wrong and she did give her side? I spoke to another secretary who thought the Star intern or reporter, asking for the information, was holding a gun behind their back, gee, I wonder why the secretary was nervous about handing over the paperwork?

Scott,

Here's an example of educators getting it right:

Educators trying new tactics to pass bond proposals
Districts break up proposals so voters can pick, pass over parts, seek more community input
By Bob Banta

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Saturday, March 18, 2006

More choices, lower sticker prices, and a marketing plan aimed at a bigger customer base. Sounds like an advertising campaign for an auto dealership.

But it's not.

Failures of recent school bond proposals in the Wimberley, Lago Vista and Round Rock districts have forced educators in Central Texas to adopt new approaches they hope will persuade voters to approve borrowing millions of dollars in bonds to build new classrooms.

For the first time since 1994, Leander school bond proponents have created a political action committee that will raise private funds to campaign for a $300 million package that goes before voters May 13. The group was formed mainly to follow rules prohibiting use of public funds for such campaigns.

"Leander has been very successful in passing bond elections," said district resident Allen Kaplan, a marketing consultant who helped form the committee. "But this group will not be complacent. It will go out and take their message to the voters."

Leander, Eanes, Manor and Lago Vista trustees are also breaking their bond packages into separate ballot questions, hoping that if voters object to one aspect of the proposal, they won't defeat the entire package.

That is a lesson learned from Round Rock's experience in 2005, when its $349 million bond was soundly defeated largely because of a $91 million high school proposal voters thought was too expensive.

Manor, with a $35.9 million package on the May 13 ballot, is splitting its proposal into four propositions. The bulk of the package asks for money to build new elementary and middle schools, but one proposition, for $15.4 million, seeks to build a new stadium for football, soccer, track and field, and band and drill squads, as well as pay for new buses and parking.

Leander's package will be in three sections, including one asking for $7 million for an indoor swimming pool complex. The other propositions ask to build eight new schools and two fine arts facilities, buy new buses and technology and renovate the high school athletic stadium.

Eanes trustees broke their $58 million proposal into two propositions: $53 million for security upgrades, buses and campus renovations and about $5 million for a covered practice field for athletics and band.

Eanes trustees separated the ballot initiatives after opponents of the practice field asked the board to let voters choose one or both expenditures.

"The board voted to split it because of feedback from the community," Eanes Superintendent Nola Wellman said.

Lago Vista, where voters rejected a $28 million single-proposition bond in February, is trying again May 13 with a package that is the same dollar amount but has been split into three portions to be voted on separately.

In Round Rock, trustees are turning to the theory that the more hands that help create their Nov. 7 bond package, the better the chances of reversing the 2005 defeat. The district is creating a citizens committee that could include as many as 120 people. Trustees expect to choose co-chairs of the new group at a meeting Monday.

"Representatives of all viewpoints will be able to have an input in this package and then go back and tell their friends what's in it and why it should be supported," Trustee Mike Alderson said. "It will be a very diverse group so we don't have any fallout over the dollar amount of the bond."

One task for the new Round Rock group, which Leander's committee also tackled, is to whittle down the total price of the bond package to a level voters can agree on. Leander started with a $453 million wish list before deciding on its $300 million package.

Round Rock trustees, with months to go before they must set the bond package, will study priorities and suggestions from the citizens committee before deciding on a final bond cost.

Liberty Hill is an example Round Rock can look to.

Last May, Liberty Hill voters rejected by an almost 3-to-1 margin a $65 million bond. The district trimmed its list down to just a $20 million package that focused on only what the district needed most immediately, forgoing an elementary school, a performance hall and an athletic complex it previously asked for.

The new, smaller measure passed, by a 3-to-1 margin, in October.

"We put on the October ballot only those projects that we had to have now," Liberty Hill Superintendent Dean Andrews said. "We still need those other facilities, but it is very hard to get long-term needs approved. These days, voters seem to want only those things the schools have to have immediately."

Hi, Arleigh:

You must have read some other editorial. I put together a reasoned, well-researched response to your original letter. I presume that is why the Star published my letter. If nothing else, mine was complete with facts. But that’s OK because facts only confuse some people. I think what bothers the teachers’ unions the most is the concept of pay for value added. It’s an entirely workable concept, one that the Denver teachers have embraced. Rather than holding on to the past, you should be leading the effort to move forward. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

You continue to take Bush to task for NCLB but the last president supported by NEA was President Clinton and he demonstrated his confidence in public education by enrolling his daughter in private school.

And, Tim, I like the idea of smaller, focused bond issues. With the failure to fulfill promises made by the SVUSD with C4, I think it's going to be very hard to get more money out of the voters. $145 million and we have no idea of how it is being spent!

Tim: Thank you for posting the Reimers piece. I never would have seen it otherwise.
Jerre: Excellent, thought-provoking piece. How Arleigh, or anyone else, can think it wasn't well researched is beyond me. I think Arleigh just doesn't understand most of what you said and reverted back to the tried and true - - - name calling.
Arleigh: Just for a change, why not engage in an intellectual discussion? I am beginning to believe you don't because you can't.

Chris,
I'm surprised you can spell intellectual. I saw the Daily News published the latest Independent Auditors report on C4 and once again found nothing wrong. Jerre, you can read my response in the Star and it will have facts, unlike your piece. As I said, I'm flattered that you and Chris are so obsessed with me. Tim, the ACLU agrees with a strict interpretation of the public records act and so do you, once again you and the ACLU are on the same side (Fullerton). What's next, are you going to give the ACLU a contribution? Since you believe in open government will you sign a letter with me asking that Dick Cheney release the minutes of his secret energy meetings, where the big oil companies wrote the Bush Administrations energy policy and drove up prices at the pump? I also read today that spending in Iraq is at 250 billion with nothing to show for it. How many American kids could have been educated with that money, how many schools could have been built? Scott, did you see 60 Minutes? Great piece on global warming and how the Bush Administration had a lawyer who was a lobbyist for big oil editing everything the scientists wrote before congress saw it.

Arleigh, your last post makes my point eloquently.
Thank you!

Chris,
I asked several people in the district if you had ever said you would "host the c4 website for free". Everyone denied you ever said that. Who exactly did you say it too?
Tim,
I see the C4 website is now filling up with information.
Scott,
I read in the paper today that Bush just increased the debt limit for the fourth time, this time to 9 trillion dollars so they can borrow another 871 billion. Your in finance, do you think that is good economic policy?

Tim,
To get back on topic. I understand that angencies are given guidelines on public records requests. The guidelines say they have ten days to find the documents and to determine if they are public records. The Star said 40% of the requests were not honored on the spot, meaning at the moment they asked. I also understand that a clerk or secretary does not have to stop their work if it is not convienent at the moment. If someone wants information that is not available until the next day how should they be notified if they refuse to give their name and phone number? Also given that most angencies have thousands of documents is it realistic to expect that every secretary and clerk knows if every document is public or not? So do you want to write the Cheney letter or should I?