Public Comment

Editors, Daily Planet: 

On the heels of the NEBA Newsletter piece against Measure A, comes the justification written by NEBA president Eleanor Pepples. Like the newsletter it is nonsense from beginning to end, and raises only the question, why is anyone with such a defective knowledge of our school system working so hard to bring it down? 

How can BSEP, which is a square footage tax, have “brought in an extra $970,000 because of high property values.”? How can a 12-year tax be “extended” to 10 years? 

Past BSEP measures have not been, as stated here, for four years. The 1986 BSEP parcel tax was for a period of eight years, the second, in 1994, for 12 years. This is a point much belabored, but it may still be worth, for once, getting right. 

She says that BUSD will collect “an extra 11 percent from the state, about $8,244.” In fact, we are getting something in the neighborhood of 4 percent. Some additional funds will be distributed by the county; but it appears that the money will be mostly restricted in use and one-time only. It is wonderful to have, but it is not the stuff of multi-year budgets, even in the bizarre world of NEBA. 

What is this “academic choice lottery which gives some families the opportunity to pick which school their children can attend” …to which “many children are denied access”? Could this be a description of the highly regarded BHS Academic Choice program, as seen from Mars?  

Everyone who wants to gets in the lottery—just as with the other small schools at Berkeley High—but, as in most lotteries, not everyone’s name is drawn. The system which sorts the children at BHS into small schools isn’t perfect, but it is also not yet two years old. A lot of people don’t like the system, but Ms. Pebbles is so far the only person who has suggested that taking away 25% of the budget and hurling the district into insolvency would be a good way to fix the problem. 

“It is interesting,” she writes, “that the Council for Neighborhood Associations (CNA) and the Berkeley Alliance of Neighborhood Associations have also come out against Measure A. No, what is interesting is that both BANA and CNA are dominated by the same small group of people, and these are the same people—neither NEBA members nor board members—who provided the inaccurate anti-Measure A information to the NEBA board. When NEBA was contacted with the offer to have a speaker familiar with school finance available to them, the offer was declined. 

As for the old insinuations about accountability, loopholes, and money diverted to administrators salaries, I can only say, read the Measure, read the report of the independent auditor.  

Ms. Pepples offers no useful suggestions as for improving the Measure, no information that is not hopelessly garbled, no facts that are not howlingly wrong. But, to be fair, she has a closing worthy of Monty Python, in which she begs the reader, almost tearfully, to vote against school funding—for the sake of the children.  

Laurie Snowden  

• 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Eleanor Pepples opinion piece in the Oct. 17 issue of he Daily Planet doesn’t really explain much about her opposition to Measure A, the renewal of the Berkeley School Excellence Project (BSEP), other than the fact she doesn’t seem to understand the measure. For the past 20 years, BSEP has enabled Berkeley students to go to less crowded classrooms, enjoy books in the school library, and have the opportunity to learn to play real musical instruments. Measure A does nothing but renew the Citizen’s of Berkeley commitment to the education of ALL our children by continuing the funding of BSEP at current rates. As a parent of a 5th grader in Rosa Parks School, a school with one of the poorest populations in the district, it is hard to imagine what our school would be like without this enhanced funding. 

Rather than debate it among the NEBA board members, they should have visited the schools themselves and talked to the parents at the sites - especially those who don’t have the resources to send their children to anything but a public school and those involved in the oversight of BSEP funds. At Rosa Parks School it has meant that teachers have more time with their students and students with special needs get help necessary to keep up; teacher skills have been enhanced in language skills and math through attendance at training courses funded by BSEP; discipline and respect are taught on the play yard by coaches who are contracted using BSEP funds; and an Environmental Science Magnet School can actually have a full time science teacher. 

Little of this would be possible and Rosa Parks School would not be making significant advances without the generous support of all Berkeley residents. These programs and many more at the other Berkeley schools are in danger if BSEP is not extended through the passage of Measure A. 

Many of the concerns about oversight and usage of the funds ignore the fact that his is an ongoing project with a history anyone can look at if they made the effort. BSEP has its own organization and independent audit trail, which is continued in Measure A. School Site Council meetings, which have oversight responsibility for BSEP funds at the individual schools, are open to anyone interested in attending. I know that the parents involved in the Site Councils take their responsibility seriously and would strongly resist and dilution of their oversight duties. Quarterly and annual reports are made to the BUSD board on income and spending of BSEP funds and are a matter of public record, a practice continued in Measure A. 

Typical of those who don’t understand what BSEP funds, Ms. Pepples brings up such irrelevant issues as the warm water pool, which has nothing to do with anything even related to Measure A, and the possibility that BUSD may get more money from the State this year, which probably won’t make up for the shortage of funding from the State in 2004 and 2005. Maybe I haven’t encountered the “academic choice” lottery yet, but anyone thinking that reducing the number of teachers would enhance any selection system is missing something. The attribution of increased revenues because of “high property values” shows that Ms. Pepples doesn’t even understand the funding mechanism; this is a parcel tax, based on size of the property, not the value.  

Something Ms. Pepples wrote everyone can agree with “...Every student deserves to have the same materials from the day class starts until graduation day and strong core curriculum..” BSEP goes a long way to achieve this goal. Approval of Measure A will keep this valuable project alive for all the students in Berkeley schools. 

Tom Killilea, Treasurer, Rosa Parks School PTA 

• 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I’m writing about Travis C. Ash’s outstanding op-ed: “Do the benefits of drug war outweigh the costs?” (berkeleydailyplanet.com, Oct. 17). The obvious answer to this question is: No. 

So why does our obviously counterproductive war on drugs continue? Why do apparently intelligent people want to arrest and jail other people who use or sell easy-to grow weeds and other chemicals that harm nobody except the willing users themselves? 

Perhaps to understand the position of our drug war cheerleaders we should study the history of the United States.  

Alcohol prohibition. The notorious gangster Al Capone made most of his illegal money from alcohol prohibition. Capone often bragged that he “owned” the city of Chicago. Obviously, he didn’t own all of the city of Chicago; however, he had most or all of the politicians and police who ran the city on his payroll. Al Capone was a successful businessman and its not unreasonable to suspect that the drug cartels of today are following his business model. 

Its also not unreasonable to suspect that the drug cartels may have many high-level politicians and police officials on their payroll. Obviously, the type of politicians the drug cartels would have on their payroll are those who advocate the continuation of the status quo of drug prohibition, which is making the drug cartels so fabulously wealthy. I’m not saying that any specific so-called “drug warrior” is on the payroll of the drug cartels—just a little suspicious. I’m just a little suspicious of the motives of all of the drug war cheerleaders. 

Kirk Muse 

Mesa, AZ 

• 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

Regarding Travis C. Ash’s thoughtful Oct. 17th op-ed, the drug war is in large part a war on marijuana, by far the most popular illicit drug. Punitive marijuana laws have little, if any, deterrent value. The University of Michigan’s Monitoring the Future Study reports that lifetime use of marijuana is higher in the United States than any European country, yet America is one of the few Western countries that uses its criminal justice system to punish citizens who prefer marijuana to martinis. Unlike alcohol, marijuana has never been shown to cause an overdose death, nor does it share the addictive properties of tobacco. The short- term health effects of marijuana are inconsequential compared to the long-term effects of criminal records. Unfortunately, marijuana represents the counterculture to many Americans. In subsidizing the prejudices of culture warriors, the U.S. government is subsidizing organized crime. The drug war’s distortion of immutable laws of supply and demand make an easily grown weed literally worth its weight in gold. The only clear winners in the war on marijuana are drug cartels and shameless tough-on-drugs politicians who’ve built careers on confusing drug prohibition’s collateral damage with a relatively harmless plant. The big losers in this battle are the taxpayers who have been deluded into believing big government is the appropriate response to non traditional consensual vices. Students who want to help end the intergenerational culture war otherwise known as the war on some drugs should contact Students for Sensible Drug Policy at www.ssdp.org. 

Robert Sharpe 

Policy Analyst 

Common Sense for Drug Policy 

Washington, D.C. 

• 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

I wanted to write and complement your newspaper on the great articles that J. Douglas Allen-Taylor was been writing about the state takeover of the OUSD. 

I was I teacher at Skyline High School in Oakland from Fall 2003 to Spring 2005 then was laid off as part of the reduction in force. During my time in Oakland I saw that things could be very different. Since I left, I have been using Google News to stay informed about the goings on in OUSD. Through that I found J. Douglas Allen-Taylor’s articles. I always felt that there where stuff going on that we where not being told. Thanks to your articles I feel enlightened about OUSD. 

Keep up the good work. 

Hank Postma 

• 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

In the story called “ A Closer Look at State Bond Measures", in the edition of The Planet for October 13-16 

I was amazed to read that somehow with Prop 1B 19 BILLION dollars would be spent with only a 19.9 MILLION bond issue!! 

This is a trick which W. Bush and the his massive debt being accrued would be happy to learn. 

Max Macks 

• 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

From the very first moment I saw Barack Obama interviewed on television, I said, “Now here’s a man I’d like to see in the White House. “But not now—he’s too young, too inexperienced and no way is this country ready for a black president.” But seeing him yesterday interviewed on the Charlie Rose Show, I thought, “Who says he’s too young?” Here’s a man of dignity, high intelligence, compassion, and one with a reasoned view of critical world issues (characteristics sadly lacking in Washington at the present). Democrats—don’t let Barack Obama get away. We need him!  

Dorothy Snodgrass 

• 

TRAFFIC SAFETY 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

This evening on my way home, I had a disturbing experience. I was driving down MacArthur Boulevard past the Emeryville border between Market and Telegraph. After the light turned green, I saw a couple of pedestrians on the opposite side of the median. I see one of them look in my direction and bolt across the street in front of me. The light had changed a few moments earlier, and I was traveling down the road around 25 mph. I slammed on my brakes to avoid hitting the group of young people attempting run across the street. The first person in the group made it across, and I missed him by inches. The second person came to a sudden halt and ended up inches from the left side of my car. I was completely shaken after the near contact. I know as a driver it is my responsibility to give pedestrians the right of way. Unfortunately, these young people were attempting to cross the far away from the intersection and crosswalk in a darkly lit section of the street. I don’t want to cast blame here, but it was a miracle I didn’t hit one of them and cause severe injury to these careless pedestrians. I wish this was the only near miss incident I have had, but I see pedestrians running across this dark street at dusk or later every other week. To all of the drivers and pedestrians out there be careful, and be logical. To the pedestrians, cross at the crosswalk, look for oncoming traffic, and cross with the green light. To all of the drivers, look out for people coming from all directions and travel slowly on dark streets.  

Jame Ervin 

Oakland 

• 

Editors, Daily Planet: 

After reading the full text Of Measure H as outlined for the voter of California, in the Sample Ballot and Voter Information Pamphlet for the Nov. 7 election, I can not give my full support to the Measure. As a long-time Berkeley resident, I find that the attempt to impeachment President Bush and Vice President Cheney to be a mere distraction of important facts. 

Although I do agree with some parts of the full text version Section 2 Findings and Declaration as noted under section number 4 A thought B. I would like to note that a full investigation of Departments, persons who provided information regrading said matter may serve American and insure the integrity of information provided to future President and their administrations.  

I would like to note that the statement’s of support by person as noted with the Arguments In Favor Of Measure H are somewhat unfair and unwarranted. These types of accusation are best handle when persons and departments are held accountable for their actions. This may include but not limited to local, state and federal offices and a review of Prop 13 pay closer attention to the monitor of programs under prop 13. Other program such as the Program for Felons which give and outline of State and local government responsibilities and Possible Federal intervention which include monitoring. The status of Limitation clause as noted with Cold Cases from local and State agencies such and Police, Sheriff, CHP and California Justice departments also make provision for possible monitoring. Local funding Under Education 2000 and other programs in which the State Senate and California Voters support allow the Federal Government to Collect and Internet Usage, this may also be true do to case filed by with The Human Rights Office, cases of ID theft ( such information can be used to investigate fraud, etc). Funding for Education and research allotted the Children Hospital can allow for cross referencing of related documents and noted with funding clauses. 

The words Above The Law also seem out of context. considering cases currently in being held by said persons. 

I urge Berkeley to vote no on H! 

And asking your local Government for detail information on programs like No Child Left Behind and the supplements services. The teaching standard and requires for Public school and after school care. 

It may be time for California to find better political leadership! 

A. Charlene Matthews 

Sole Owner Of C.Y.A. InterPrizes