In the computer lab the other night, someone tried to goad me the other night in the presence of Aly Stark saying, in effect, that they hoped "her" ballot initiative passes. Here's a fair article from Wes Woods about how the big money is all on the side of increasing taxes on home owners who can't afford it after another bond initiative it passed and hasn't paid off. It's home owners versus out of town (and sometimes even out of state) money. Of course you'd expect liberals to line up on the side of the little guy, but then you'd be totally wrong to think that liberals care about the little guy anymore.
Out-of-district firms big donors to Claremont school district's Measure CL bond measure
Wes Woods II, Staff Writer
Created: 10/28/2010 09:12:24 PM PDT
CLAREMONT - Firms outside of the Claremont Unified School District's boundaries have contributed the bulk of the monetary support to get a school bond measure passed on Election Day.
Voters on Tuesday will decide whether the district can issue $95 million in facilities improvement bonds under Measure CL.
The Support Claremont Schools Yes on CL campaign committee has received more than $109,800 in contributions, while Claremont Taxpayers for Common Sense has raised less than $4,000, according to financial disclosure forms.
Construction or architectural companies, banks or planners are among the largest financial supporters of the measure.
"This is some serious David and Goliath," said Betty Crocker, member of Claremont Taxpayers for Common Sense and a No on Measure CL rally organizer.
"Cupcakes vs. special interest money of CUSD vendors. Here we are making cupcakes (to raise funds). It's why these (No on Measure CL) rallies are so important. It begins to show Claremont there are a lot of people who are 'no' on Measure CL."
The bonds, if approved, will complete significant repairs and upgrades to buildings and equipment in the district's schools.
The measure would cost property owners in the district about $45 per $100,000 of assessed value for 30 years.
The financial filings by supporters of Measure CL are not that unusual, said Doug Johnson, a research fellow with Claremont McKenna College's Rose Institute.
"I think this reflects what, for better or worse, is standard practice these days," Johnson said.
"Just from my quick look, all the non-Claremont firms writing big checks are service providers to the school district. That is more and more common. You see that is more and more common in local campaigns."
But, for a city like Claremont, $100,000 is still a lot of money, Johnson said.
"This election cycle is hard to get your word out because so much is being spent at the top of the ticket," he said.
Johnson pointed to gubernatorial candidates Meg Whitman and Jerry Brown as well as U.S. Senate candidate Carly Fiorina as overwhelming everyone with their campaign spending. The three candidates have combined to spend tens of millions of dollars on their campaigns.
"It makes it more difficult and more expensive for lower ticket items to get the word out," Johnson said.
"That reflects the expense of running campaigns these days and the trends across the state jurisdiction now turn to vendors to fund campaigns that fund the projects."
Yes on Measure CL treasurer J. Michael Fay said most of businesses that have contributed money to the campaign received work contracts following the passage of the Measure Y school improvement bond in 2000.
"These campaigns are terribly expensive and Measure Y cost $85,000. It's a similar kind of campaign except we have inflation," Fay said.
There are only about three companies nationwide that can implement these bonds once they are authorized by voters, he said.
Opponents of Measure CL said they're still paying taxes on Measure Y, which was passed in 2000, at $76 per $100,000 assessed value.
There are only three companies nationwide who can bid for the work if the bonds are approved, he said.
"All of them in the business will get 1 percent of implementing the bond at the lowest possible rate," Fay said. "Whether we went with one or we went with the other two the district did its due diligence on price. I think it's fair to contribute back to the district since they're making what they are making."
Fay said a similar process occurred with Measure Y.
"Most of the $85,000 did come from companies that had previous contracts with the district," Fay said. "Any contract is done by bidding only. Just because you're donating money doesn't mean you end up with a contract. I know the opposition seems to want to say that there's a quid pro quo but there is none."
The Claremont Taxpayers for Common Sense, as of Wednesday, had not raised the minimum $1,000 required to fill out a 460 form. The form requires candidates to provide the amount of campaign contributions received, a Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder spokeswoman said
However, Opanyi K. Nasiali, member of the anti-Measure CL organization, said a more recent filing will show his group has raised close to $3,000.
"Our side we have raised more money from the community and local people in the community than they have," Nasiali said. "We have not received any big contributions from anybody outside the community like they have."
The pro-Measure CL group has spent about $48,000. The largest payments went to campaign consultants TBWB Strategies in San Francisco for $15,000, printing and mailings for $19,722, materials and expenses for $5,268 and travel campaign literature for $1,868.
FYI
Top 5 Donors to Support Claremont Schools Yes on CL
1. WLC Architects in Rancho Cucamonga: $25,000
2. Piper Jaffray (an international investment bank) in Minneapolis: $25,000
3. TELACU Construction Management Inc. in Los Angeles: $20,000
4. Vanir Construction Management. Inc. in Sacramento: $10,000
5. Adolph Ziemba, AIA and Associates Inc. in Burbank (project management): $10,000.
Top 5 Donors to Claremont Taxpayers for Common Sense
1. John Joseph McDermott, retired: $200
2. Donna S. Lowe, sales: $100
3. Lisa Doose, retired: $100
4. Conrad C. Casler, retired: $100
5. Joe A. Aguirre, business owner: $100
11 comments:
What is the ax you have to grind with Aly Stark? This is the second post you brought her up. In this case, someone mentions her in your presence, and you needed to write another post? Methinks she spurned you in some debate or on some other occassion. Back off stalker boy.
If he doesn't attack people from behind a computer screen, what the hell is he going to write about?
Are you new here or something?
In order to bring legitimacy to your claims you really need to stop prefacing them as an attack against particular individuals at the Claremont Colleges, particularly when it's not even a direct reference to something that particular person said. It's petty and unsubstantial. Certainly you can bring up the article in reference to a criticism that person made of you. But some off-handed comment made by some anonymous person in a computer lab is an inappropriate basis for directing your article as an attack on someone else, even overlooking ethical considerations.
Here's the context:
Eric Van Oss who annoyingly make way too much noise in the computer lab saw me, went out of his way to talk to Aly Stark CMC '11 about it. The tone and manner in which he said it indicated that he was trying to get a rise out of me. He knows I oppose it because I have written about the bond initiative before.
I understand that you may feel that Eric Van Oss "annoyingly make (sic) way too much noise in the computer lab, but that is not a story. Leave Aly Stark out this. The story is...you are troubled.
Understood. Nevertheless, it's important to avoid allowing these instances to permeate your writing. Certainly, we all have the right to defend ourselves but in this case you're applying an esoteric private event in a public context. I think it's important to let your words speak for themselves. Certainly, I won't deny the legitimacy of your right to make an argument about the Claremont issue, you certainly know much more about it than I do, but I'd hope that you only include personal context in the event that it is published(at least in some way that reaches the public to the same extent as your blog). Otherwise you run the risk of damaging the integrity of your academic argument, which may be good, in favor of eliciting personal ire.
Thanks for the advice, Max, though I think my critics will seize on whatever they can to mock, ridicule, or disparage me. As exhibit A, see above.
Yeah in the same vein their arguments aren't substantive in the sense that they contribute to the debate at hand. I think it's easier for people to latch onto personal vendettas as opposed to legitimate debate (legitimate in the academic sense of the word) regarding the issue.
Charles Johnson, I hope you learn some valuable lessons by this exchange. As Max writes, it is easier "to latch onto personal vendettas" than to really explore the issues.
When you brought a young lady into the debate to begin with and then defended that by a reference to "Eric Van Oss who annoyingly" bothers you, then you did your own arguements no service.
Stick to the facts, and then inferences and concluions that you can draw from those facts.
College is a time to learn, and I hope you have learned something by the inappropriateness of your personal remarks and attacks towards Ms. Stark and Mr. Van Oss. A public appology would be the appropriate response at this point.
"I think my critics will seize on whatever they can to mock, ridicule, or disparage me. As exhibit A, see above."
Have you ever considered that your critics might be criticizing you, not simply for fun, but because your personal attacks and ill-informed rants deserve criticism?
I mean that's like me punching someone in the face (from behind a computer screen), being called out on the face-punching by people who question my need to attack, and then me trying to put the spotlight on them for calling me out in the first place? Have you ever stopped to think, "maybe I'm being a total ass?"
I know, I know... American exceptionalism blah blah.. never admit to being wrong blah blah.
But really you're behaving like an eight-year-old.
"Eric Van Oss who annoyingly make way too much noise in the computer lab"
Yeah, he sounds like a big doody pants -- but dude, you make more than enough annoying noise yourself.
Max is right. When you frame your posts in anger, attacks, and cowardice, the comments section reflects that, and the post itself gets left behind.
CL fails 60% to 40% claremont is tired of the wastful spending of cusd. we are paying of the 49,000,000 Y bond from 2000. for another 18 years. always question spending if it is there they will waste it.
Post a Comment