Arnold made a deal and then lied and broke the deal. To cover up he had the state spend 50 million on a Special Election, which he lost big time. Now that he could not get his bonds on the June ballot because Sacramento republicans would not support him, he is again talking about education. In his May budget revision look for a new boost in Education spending.

Tim:

I think Arleigh has it right when he says there will be a boost in education spending in May. On Education there will little difference in the education debate for the voters.

The key question will be whether voters want to continue to close the budget deficit Arnold's way or whether they want increased taxes to do it?

Scott

There is no question the May revise will have higher education funding, but how much of thatr is due to increased revenues? A lot of it, and the increase is then the result of locking in Prop 98 mins.

That's not the question however. The question, is are the schools really broken?

Tim

Scott,
State revenues are running about 142 million higher than projected in Jauary, also they could see another jump as tax returns are completed prior to April 17. In terms of broken schools Tim I don't think there is an easy answer. We have some high school seniors in the area headed to Harvard, Stanford, etc. For them the system worked. For students not passing the new exit exam the system is not working. But the schools are only part of the equation. The students who put in the work, the parents who make sure their kids are progressing are all vital factors. The lack of funding does mean we cannot offer lower class sizes, new intervention programs, more counselors, etc.

Tim,
You never got back to me on my request for us all to write an open letter to Dick Cheney asking him to release the minutes of his secret energy meetings where he let the big oil companies write the energy policy for the U.S. The topic at the time was on Sunshine week, you were upset that some local school districts had not immediately complied with requests for information and you were backing the ACLU's interpretation of the law. Now that we are all paying $3 a gallon for gas don't you think we are entitled to see those minutes? The high cost of fuel means School Districts are paying more for just about everything meaning less dollars for the classroom. I would be happy to write the letter and send you a draft. Maybe Scott and Brian will sign it, maybe Jerre will also.

Arleigh, if these meetings were secret how do you know about them?

Arleigh:

I believe in open government. I believe the Cheney meetings fell under "executive privilege" the same way the Clinton pardon of Marc Rich came out on the last days of Clinton's term.

Please prepare your letter. I'd like to review what arguments for those minutes you will use to get around "executive privilege."

Scott

Arleigh,

I think my thoughts on energy would surprise you, but we won't discuss them here. If Dennert wants to do a blog entry on the energy issues facing our country, I will post there.

But, I assume if you want me to sign this letter, that you wouldn't have a problem signing an open letter to the SVUSD board asking them to post something meaningful, say meeting notices, minutes or budgets or bids related to C4 construction on the C4 web site? See, those are actually required by law? For consistency, wouldn't you sign this letter?

http://207.157.143.49/cgi-bin/index.cfm

See, I don't buy this nonsense that now that they kind of have a web site, that they are full comliance. The Bond Auditors didn't agree either. You could read that in their report.... well, if it was posted somewhere.

Tim

Jerre,
Don't you read the paper or watch T.V. news? There was a huge fight and debate over Cheney refusing to release the minutes of his secret energy meetings because the big oil companies where there and basically wrote the policy. Looks like a real double standard. Scott can local Districts and Governments claim "Executive Privelege?" Didn't Nixon say that a lot? So Jerre when Cheney refuses to release minutes of a meeting that resulted in $3 gas, a war, attempts to drill in the Arctic National Reserve, your okay with that? When a Secretary thinks someone asking for the Superintendents contract is holding a gun behind their back and they ask some questions, then you and Tim hit the roof because they did not comply immediately with the law as the ACLU said they should? If Cheney has nothing to hide, why not release the minutes? What is he afraid of? I just saw on CNN that Libby said Cheney told him that Bush had okayed the release of secret data on the war. Tim, call Lowell Schulze and Gary Nottingham, ask them to post the information you are looking for, if they say no, write your letter.

Arleigh:

Every President has used Executive Privilege.

Scott,
So your saying it is okay for Bush and Cheney to use Executive privelege to cover up their secret energy meetings, etc, but that this should not apply to anyone else in the Country? In other words they are above the law?

Since executive privilege has applied to every President and Washington was the first to use it, I think your argument that Bush is above the law is incorrect.

Just because the President is empowered to grant pardons and everyone else can't grant pardons doesn't mean the President is above the law.

That's kind of a leap.

Are you trying to undo executive privilege based on the fact that you don't like Bush?

Should we change the constitution based on who is in power?

Tim:

I don't believe in saying the schools are broken. Like any organization, there are things we need to improve and things that are working really well.

I ideal is to bring new issues to light like this blog accomplishes.

One issue no one is talking about is CALSTRS long term gap in funding teacher pensions. Next year, it appears greater pressure will be placed on the system, yet no one has come forward with a plan.

Who should foot the bill? Teachers, the state, the school districts?

Scott

Arleigh,

Thanks for your suggestion to call the district about the web site. I'd rather they just comply with the law on their own.

It's funny.. you're awfully demanding about Cheney and executive privelage, and yet, here, in an issue that matters to us locally, you let them get away with it.

Weird...

Tim

Tim,
As a concerned citizen are you saying you have no responsibility to make sure they post everything that should be there on the bond website? Isn't it a basic rule of democracy that citizens must participate and hold their elected officials responsible? For example, we now know Bush was the source of the leaks, he said he would "Take care of" the person leaking information. If republicans do not impeach Bush they will all go down as the biggest coward, hypocrites, in U.S. history! Maybe that is why a new poll showed that by a margin of 16% Americans want democrats to take back control of congress, they are sick and tired of no checks and balances.
Scott,
In terms of CalSTRS they are about to come out with recommendations to close the future 20 billion dollar funding gap. As of right now STRS could pay everyone full benefits for 60 years without making changes. This means STRS is in much better shape then Social Security. Hey, whatever happened to Bush "fixing" Social Security anyway? Also Scott, since 90% of new businesses fail in the first five years, doesn't that mean Tim's "Business model" is broken? Why would we want to apply a "business model" to schools that has a 90% failure rate?

Arleigh,

Do you work in the department of redundancy department? This blog IS my work as a concerned citizen. Now, what are you doing?

Tim

Tim,
As usual I'm trying to bring some truth and sanity to your blog.

Let me know when that starts so I can alert the media.

Tim

Hi Arleigh:

Thanks for the info on CALSTRS. Are you basically saying that the doomsayers on the unfunded portion are wrong? 60 years seems like a long time.

What's Tim's business model again? From my unserstanding Tim is pretty successful businessman. Are you saying his business model or business model's in general?

This is a good question to ask, If most new businesses fail within the first five years, is that really the model to aplys to school districts?

I feel they are totally different structural entities. You can take succesful methods of business, fiannce, management and apply them to school districts, but I'm not sure you can apply something motivated solely by a profit motive and overlap it on rule based organizations like school districts, cities, or even federal agencies.

Are you saying you can't take anything from business and apply it to schools?

Scott

Arleigh:

Below is from yesterday's Orange County Register.

Let pension funds stick to pensions

Angelides' funding scheme is a bad idea

Political campaigns usually bring out a few good ideas -- and a multitude of bad ones. One of the nuttier ones we've seen comes from state Treasurer Phil Angelides, who is running for governor in the June Democratic primary against Controller Steve Westly.

On Monday he proposed that the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS), and the California State Teachers' Retirement System
(CalSTRS) "should invest $15 billion in urban infrastructure to provide a reliable funding source as the state looks to improve its
bridges and freeways," reported the April 4 Los Angeles Daily News. This would mean that the giant pension funds would "invest up to 5
percent of their assets in projects that generate income from bridge tolls and other user fees."

He has been critical -- as have we -- of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposal to spend up to $72 billion in general-obligation bonds on
infrastructure improvements. And, obviously, there is a need for infrastructure improvements in California.

But state and local public employee pension funds exist for one reason: to maximize investment income to provide for retirees'pensions. The Angelides proposal is "an imprudent allocation of
resources," Steven Frates, senior fellow at the Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College, told us. "Pension funds are stretched, anyway, given the lavish awards that go to public employees. Using these funds in any way other than to pay the very rich pension benefits is very bad public policy."

He pointed out that, according to state law, if public retirement funds cannot cover retirees' guaranteed benefits, then the funds must
be made up from the general fund -- that is, from taxpayers.

As for toll roads and other infrastructure improvements, if they are good, solid ideas, private capital will be readily available to fund
them. This is seen in the Trans-Texas Corridor, a $7.2 billion toll-road network in the Lone Star State.

With California taxpayers already facing massive new costs to pay for retiree health costs for public employees, no more burdens are needed.
Mr. Angelides should forget such gimmicks and instead find solutions that work for California.

Since CTA endorsed Angelides, do they support using pension funds for public improvements instead of retirements?

Scott