Measure C wins, Gus Kramer keeps his job, and David Livingston is elected our new sheriff

Mount Diablo Unified School District's Measure C bond passed with 61 percent of the vote, clearing the 55-percent hurdle it needed to win. Thirty-nine percent of voters said no.

Meanwhile, Gus Kramer will be keeping his job as Contra Costa County Assessor, winning 55 percent of the vote. Mark Peterson was is ahead in the District Attorney's race, but not by a majority. He will face a November runoff against his rival, Dan O'Malley.

David Livingston was elected Sheriff with 56 percent of the vote.

See more specifics on the Measure C race here on Walnut Creek Patch, and on these other Contra Costa County races here.

OMG: It's Election Day and I have so not done my homework!

And, I can't even find my voter guide.

It's in a pile somewhere of mail I was supposed to go through, I don't know weeks ago. Maybe it's sitting there with my unopened health insurance cards.

Am I a bit scattered? Does my stupid pretty cat me-ow desperately when she wants to be let outside?

The Walnut Creek Patch job has been keeping me extremely busy. As you can tell, I have not been able to do my Crazy in Suburbia blogs as much as I would like. :(

I don't see my husband and son as I often as I should either. My son gave me a talking to last night.

And, now we have election day, and I realize that I'm not measuring up in that arena either. I am not the engaged, informed member of our democratic system that I like to be.

OK, here's the extend of my ignorance: Those state propositions: who, what where, and why 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. Actually some pro-Proposition 14 guys tried to hit me up with some literature at the farmers market Sunday. Yeah, I think was proposition 14. It could have been Proposition 15 they were touting. I honestly don't know. Well, I guess both propositions have something to do with reforming the elections process--maybe to keep idiots like me out of the voting booth.

Oh, but that wouldn't be very democratic, would it? Even idiots like me should have the right to vote. We do, I believe, with some frequency. :)

OK, I have some familiarity with some races, including local ones: the District Attorney's and Sheriff's races, the county Assessor battle. Too bad I can't vote on the Mount Diablo Unified School District's Measure C bond measure. I probably know more about that race than any other because I've been editing and writing and reading stories about it. Unfortunately, I don't live in that district, so I won't have a say.

Then we have, of course, the gubernatorial primary. That's the biggie. Oh, then there is the U.S Senate GOP primary, and the 10th congressional district race. Wait! Didn't I just vote in that? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Back in 2009 or something: the special election to replace former U.S. Rep Ellen Tauscher.

Well, thanks for letting me write this. I think I am slowly becoming more knowledgeable about some things I should be knowledgeable about. I'll probably do what I typically do when there are races I must vote in, and of which I'm totally ignorant. I peruse endorsements in major local and state newspapers. Hey, mainstream media is good for something, right?

Meanwhile, if any of you have any useful advice and tips, send them this way.

MDUSD parents: Do you think you've been inappropriately lobbied to vote a certain way in the Measure C race?

The Mayor of Claycord shares a story from a fellow Claycordian about what this parent viewed as some pretty heavy-handed pro-Measure C lobbying from her child's elementary school principal.

The anonymous writer said she went to an orientation for her daughter to start kindergarten at an unnamed school in the Mt. Diablo Unified School District.

Claycord.com quoted the parent as saying:

"In with the kindergarten packet was one sheet of paper telling me why I needed to vote “YES” on Measure C in the upcoming election. She then went on to give us a 15-minute speech on why it was the most important vote we will make this year and how our children are depending on us to vote “YES.'"

I am accustomed to superintendents in the two school districts I live in--Walnut Creek and Acalanes Union--to send out e-mails urging us parents to vote one way or another--usually yes--on school-related parcel tax or bond measures. That seems to be par for the course. But did the administrator at this school cross some kind of line in advocating parents to vote in favor the the $348 million bond measure next Tuesday.

According to this Crazy poll, Measure C is gonna lose

There is one day left to participate in this Crazy in Suburbia poll on the Mt Diablo Unifed School District bond measure; so far 63 percent of the 138 polled said they would vote no, 32 percent said yes. Six percent are still undecided.

I am the first to say that this poll is not scientific. However, the results of the poll I conducted on the recent Measure A parcel tax election for the Acalanes Unified School District turned out to be pretty on target, predicting within 1 percentage point the final winning result--68.5 percent--of that May 4 election.

Measure C purports "to support quality education and safety for local students, and reduce impacts of State budget cuts by improving science, career and technical education facilities; upgrading classroom instructional technology; repairing leaky roofs; improving safety; maximizing energy efficiency including adding solar panels and modern air conditioning; and repairing, replacing, equipping or modernizing other school facilities."

As we near voting day, June 8, the Contra Costa Times published this no on C guest column, and one that doesn't come from the usual suspects: the folks who generally oppose any kind of new taxes.

This column, published last Wednesday, comes from activists in the MDUSD. They are: A.J. Fardella,of Pittsburg, who was a member of the district's Measure C Bond Oversight Committee; Carla Ludwig, of Walnut Creek, and Karen Barta, of Martinez, who are former members of CUES (Community United for Excellent Schools).

As you can read, they question whether the $348 million facilities bond is affordable and responsible. They also question whether this is the only option available to offset the devastating cuts to education. And they are concerned about what they call the behind-closed-doors approach the district used to formulate the bond measure, "without community input, including that of the current Measure C Bond Oversight Committee."

"We completely agree that a local funding source is required, but we don't agree Measure C is the right vehicle or that it is affordable or responsible."

They point out that Measure C is an extension of the 2002 Measure C bond, has a term of 42 years, and will generate $348 million in revenue. But it will cost $1.87 billion.

"The bond measure was approved by the board in March, but it wasn't until April when a reporter asked for the cost analysis that MDUSD disclosed the overall cost to taxpayers."

The district says that the money raised will provide a wide range of school improvements.

But with regard to the solar program, the district has "not provided a comprehensive plan showing revenues and expenses over time," these writers say. As for the after-school facilities, the district has not listed any improvements except for playground equipment at a handful of elementary schools, the writers contend.

Their solution: "This district can and should do the hard work necessary to pass a parcel tax; a funding source that can actually save programs at this crucial point in time."

Debating the pros and cons of Measure C

Voters in the Mt. Diablo Unified School District will be going to the polls in a couple weeks to vote on Measure C, which would allow district to borrow $348 million to fund school construction and upgrades. 


It could be me, because I don't live in the MDUSD, but this ballot measure snuck up on me. Last year at the same time, I was hearing lots more about Measure D, the MDUSD parcel tax initiative that missed receiving the two-thirds vote it required to pass. 


Driving around Ygnacio Valley this weekend, I didn't see too many Yes on Measure C signs up. Not as many as I would expect.  Okay, we've still got two weeks until the June 8 election. But I'm  still wondering whether this bond measure was put together, somewhat quickly, in response to the Measure D loss. Is the district just trying to raise extra revenue in any way possible? They couldn't get the money last year to pay for teachers and classroom programs. Now, they are attempting to get money that will pay for construction projects and facility upgrades. Afull list of Measure C projects is available on the district's website: visit MDUSD.org and click on "Community."


The district's chances of passing the measure are higher, because it only requires 55 not 66 percent of the vote. 


Anyway, here are excerpts of local community leaders and journalists, offering differing viewpoints on Measure C. And you vote on the Crazy poll at least, telling the rest of us how you intend to vote in the June 8 election.


The first is pro-Measure C commentary from Walnut Creek City Councilman Kish Rajan and Jenny Reik, the chair of the Pleasant Hill Education Commission.  Their commentary was published in the Contra Costa Times. 

Our local school district, Mt. Diablo Unified, has provided great local education for decades, but today it faces significant challenges. Continuous state budget cuts over the past three years have taken a serious toll on our local schools.

Measure C won't solve every problem facing our local schools, but it will provide critical support to local students when state funding is increasingly unreliable. It will go a long way toward helping local students meet today's and tomorrow's challenges.

Measure C will add classroom instructional technology and upgrade science and computer labs. Improved technology will enhance advanced classes and elementary instruction in math, science and language. It will provide students the relevant technical skills they need to compete for careers in tomorrow's job market. Measure C projects also include energy-efficiency improvements like solar and other upgrades that will secure state incentive grants and cut costly utility bills.

Measure C will also fix leaky roofs and windows, upgrade, renovate and repair neighborhood schools that date from the 1950s and '60s, and make other basic repairs to schools that are outdated and deteriorating. Measure C will provide safe places for supervised after-school activities like athletics and fine arts.

A full list of Measure C projects by school site is available on the district's website: visit MDUSD.org and click on "Community."

Measure C is affordable and responsible. It maintains the tax rate voters approved with the last local school measure in 2002, without increasing taxes above that rate. In addition, by law, Measure C has taxpayer safeguards in place: All funds will be subject to independent citizen oversight and annual audits, and funds can't be taken by the state. Audits have shown that the original Measure C was implemented effectively. That commitment will continue with this Measure C.

Contra Costa Times columnist Daniel Dorenstein had less nice things to day about Measure C in his column: Exorbitant price tag on Measure C

Mt. Diablo school officials never provided voters key information that would reveal the tremendous cost of the district's bond proposal on the June ballot.

To understand the exorbitant price tag of Measure C, think of a home mortgage. If you were to borrow $348,000 to buy a house using a conventional 30-year mortgage at 5 percent annual interest, you would end up paying $672,530 in principal and interest over the life of the loan. In other words, you would pay back roughly double what you borrowed.

In contrast, with Measure C, district officials seek permission to borrow $348 million to fund school construction and upgrades. But officials haven't told voters that they plan to stretch the repayment out over more than 40 years with most of the pain coming on the back end. To cover the principal and interest, property owners, by one estimate, would have to pay $1.87 billion in taxes, or more than five times the amount borrowed.

It seems that even school officials didn't know the full expense. When Superintendent Steven Lawrence came to us last month seeking editorial backing for Measure C, I asked him what the total cost would be. He had no idea. Indeed, the district didn't generate the number until Iasked for it. ... 

... Here's another problem: Bonds for construction don't address the district's most critical problem. What the school system needs first is money for its day-to-day operations that have been shortchanged by the state budget crisis. For that, the district needs a parcel tax, an annual assessment to raise money for the general fund. The problem is that requires approval of two-thirds of the voters, a threshold the district failed to meet when it put a parcel tax on the ballot in May 2009 and only received 59 percent approval.

District officials considered trying again. But when polling showed they couldn't meet the two-thirds threshold, they instead turned to the bond proposal, which requires approval of only 55 percent of voters. It's like going shopping for a car when you need transportation, but buying a house instead. 

Meanwhile, Bill Gram--Reefer, publisher of the political Halfway to Concord blog is very much opposed to Measure C: 

Taxpayers in Contra Costa County can’t catch a break. Not only are they faced with crushing public employee pension costs negotiated by Supervisors more concerned about union bosses than citizens, but now the Mt Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD) wants to pour $1.87 billion down the drain while playing patty cake with BIG LABOR in the form of an ongoing Project Labor Agreement (PLA) that raises construction costs by 20%!