Shameful Tripe, Grammar Lesson and S Lets off “Sinfully Rich”

May 29, 2003

Dear Editor,

What shameful tripe, full of fabrications posing as fact. (“OPINION: Measure S Not Real Answer,” May 28)

Matt Millen, you should be ashamed of your willingness to hold the children of this city hostage to your own sad agenda.

Denny Zane
Santa Monica

May 29, 2003

Dear Editor,

By the time this letter runs, Measure S will be a thing of the past. It should not, however, be the end of our debate about education. I call attention to the recent letter by Superintendent John E. Deasy. (“Message from Superintendent John E. Deasy,” May 26)

In his fourth paragraph Mr. Deasy writes, "While the current proposed budget by our 'Education Governor' calls for less new cuts, it does not restore any of the cuts we have made for next year."

Apparently no one ever taught Superintendent Deasy the difference between "fewer" and "less." For those who were similarly ill-educated by whatever lackluster excuse for a public school they attended, please note that "fewer" applies when a numerical accounting can be made while "less" applies to amounts that cannot be broken down numerically.

In practical application we would then say that if Measure S has failed to pass the schools will have to make do with "fewer dollars" or "less money."

Sadly, many people will read this letter and think that I'm being picky.

Grammar doesn't matter, right? Wrong. Grammar matters immensely. We share a common language. It is incumbent upon us all -- and especially upon educators -- to not only encourage its proper usage but to set an example. So why do I get the feeling that if Mr. Deasy gets his money he won't be putting it toward English composition?

Wade Major
Malibu

May 29, 2003

Dear Editor,

There is a Santa Monica Malibu Unified School Board theory to solve their overspending problems, which states that if you are choking on an ice cube, don't panic! Simply pour a jug of boiling water down your throat and presto! The blockage is almost instantly removed.

The sinfully rich of Malibu along with the Malibu City Council have once gain persisted by placing Measure S (a reworked version of the defeated Measure EE) on next week’s special election ballot.

The Santa Monica homeowners, Santa Monica renters and those individuals living on fixed incomes will once again be burdened with this additional property tax, if it is passed, for years to come.

The sinfully rich celebrities and well-heeled corporate executives of Malibu, living in their gigantic ocean view citadels of 25,000-plus square feet will pay the same amount of additional inequitable school parcel property taxes as the 1,500-square-foot Santa Monica house.

The Santa Monica homeowners, fixed income and renters are paying the major portion of the current parcel taxes and contributions to the Santa Monica Malibu Unified School district. The city of Santa Monica gave a donation (gift) of over $3,000,000 to the school district last year, while the Malibu City Council was voting down a donation to the district.

Instead Malibu City endorsed an addition Parcel Tax on Santa Monica homeowners, those of fixed income and renters. The Malibu school district teachers, administrators, unions along with their PTA's have helped raised close to $200,000 to prop up Measure S.

Measure S was promised as a measure to "Save Our Schools." It quickly became "Save Our Jobs" and is now known as "SAVE MY JOB." Superintendent John Deasy stated that with the financial problems in the State of California few of the budget cuts will be reinstated even if the Measure S passes.

In the end, Superintendent Deasy stated, the financial condition of the schools rests with the State of California Governor. This is the same governor who is currently attempting to gather our existing Parcel Tax (Measure Y) and distribute the moneys equally among all California school districts.

"The Parcel Tax" written by Professor Eric J. Brunner of San Diego State University for the Public Policy Institute of California, states that the Parcel Tax (Measure S) is used by the wealthy school districts to avoid the Serrano v. Priest decision which equally divides all education equally within the state, i.e., poor and wealthy schools receive the same amount of moneys for the education of each child.

Professor Brunner concludes that 1) The marginal cost of school spending under the parcel tax is high compared to the corresponding cost under the property tax 2) The Parcel tax is highly regressive because the low-income homeowners bear a disproportionate share of the tax burden. 3) And that the Parcel Tax raises issues of equity and most likely will put California's system of Public School Finance back on trial.

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association endorses NO ON Measure S I ask you to Vote NO on Measure S.