1. Why does it seem that most people agree that a parcel tax would better serve our children but we are pursuing a bond instead?
2. If the bond brings in $348 million to the district why does it cost taxpayers $1.87 BILLION?
3. If this bond passes what exactly will I see at my local school that will lessen the impact from the most recent cuts and cuts still to come?
4. Can the direct proceeds from this bond go toward the general fund to save programs and teachers or are the funds restricted to costs associated with facilities and equipment?
5. The literature says the bond rate I approved in 2002 won’t increase but will my tax bill increase?
6. I hear the solar project will be up in 18 months, doesn’t that mean we will still have to deal with the current budget cycle, the next budget cycle and halfway through the 2011-12 cycle before we see the estimated $3mil in relief from energy costs? How does that help us now?
7. I understand there are costs associated with the solar project but have not seen any information about maintenance, repairs, replacement, insurance, security, or administration? What are the costs? Is there a feasibility study outlining the revenues, costs, and timeline?
8. What does the district mean when they say “provide safe places for supervised after-school activities like athletics and fine arts that help keep kids on the right track?” Does this mean new fields, aquatic centers, theaters, etc… because I don’t see those things on the list?
9. Why can so many other school districts including Oakland, Walnut Creek, Pittsburg, Matinez, San Ramon, and West Contra Costa County pass a parcel tax, even with the 2/3 requirement, and we can’t?
10. I have been told that our community really needs a parcel tax to be competitive with surrounding districts, will people be leary of voting for a parcel tax in the near future if they approve this bond measure now?