Crazy Stuff! And A School Board Meeting

You may have noticed (well, probably not, but allow me to flatter myself) that I wasn’t here two weeks ago when the Board last met to discuss important things.  I was myself discussing important things with a bunch of teachers, school administrators and education reformers at the Deeper Learning Proof Point Network’s 2011 Innovation in Education Summit at Cavallo Point, as a student representative from Da Vinci, and with a giant hotel room across from the Golden Gate Bridge fully paid for by the Hewlett Foundation.  No big deal or anything.

And then I presented about all of it (with another student who came) to my school’s teachers and staff and a few people from the District Cabinet, and then I was interviewed for an upcoming article on New Tech Network President Lydia Dobyns’ Huffington Post blog about the conference.

And then I applied to college.

So I’ve been rather busy, and am now a little too backlogged on work (I really need to start understanding implicit differentiation within the next 18 hours, so that’s kind of an issue), but that’s okay, kind of.

So… yeah.

Well, anyway the School Board agenda is here and it looks like there’s going to be a bunch of discussion about Measures Q and W (the parcel taxes up for renewal next year).   Also, some  more stuff about Community Facilities District 2, which I’m fairly certain no one cares much about because I’ve never seen anyone at the public hearings.  Meeting starts tomorrow at 7!

7:00- I think I was the first one here for the first time ever.  In other milestones that don’t matter, this is the first of my liveblogs without the word “liveblog” in the title since my second post, and the first one ever without either “liveblog” or “live” in the title.  And also the first meeting I’ve been to in November 2011!  So many firsts.

7:40- More public comment than usual, about Measures Q and W– mostly runs along predictable we-support-renewal  lines but with a surprising detour into milk carton composting, with someone from some anti-tax political group at the end to spice things up with disapproval and vague accusations of voter disenfranchisement.  And on to presentations!  Superintendent Roberson offers us a preview of this first item, which will consist of a presentation from pollster Ziegler &  Associates; a finalization of the ballot language; and the calling of an election.

7:55-70% of voters would “definitely” or “probably” vote to renew existing parcel tax, with support peaking at a 5-year term for taxes; support falls after that.  Note that the parcel tax requires a 2/3 supermajority for renewal and so, while not a bad place for the Board to start off at, these numbers reflect an extremely close margin.

Increasing the parcel tax rate by $100 drops support significantly, but reducing it by the same amount does not raise support.  Large majorities of voters consider themselves more likely to vote for the parcel tax after being told that it is responsible for 10% of the Board’s budget; hearing a list of programs it supports; and learning of accountability measures attached to the measure.  However, support remains essentially the same after testing these messages as before, suggesting that those large majorities are mostly comprised of people who already support the measures.

8:15- Haggling over ballot language–mostly a bunch of discussion about how best to tie the parcel tax to inflation.

8:45- A brief moment of confusion for me after Susan Lovenburg’s references to an “all-male ballot,” before I figure out that, of course, she is describing the mail-in (all-mail) special election.

8:55- Antitax speaker from earlier rails against “forced tuition” in public schools in the form of parcel taxes, which is funny because it’s not like public schools are free anyway if you consider taxes tuition…he also put his child in a private school in San Francisco, so that’s just confusing.

9:00- A fact that I meant to transcribe earlier but forgot about: while the current margin of support is narrow given the 2/3 supermajority requirement, it’s also true that support for the renewal of Measures Q and W is higher than support at comparable points for  Measure W and Measure A, both school parcel taxes that passed (the latter barely).

Board adopts ballot language and/or places it on the ballot (I got a little lost in the procedure there, but I think they’ve done both of those things at some point so far), my confusion rendering the moment a little anticlimactic.  Room mostly clears out, and we move on to that Community Facilities District 2 thing.

9:05- Motion carries on the resolution!  So that’s exciting.

(From what I gather, it mostly has to do with annexing new developments to facilities districts so that they can be taxed for utilities, or something along those lines.)

9:10- Meeting adjourned!