Hope our elected leaders take the results to heart and make
changes
YOUR VIEWS
Hope our elected leaders take the results to heart and make changes
Dear Editor,
Congratulations to all our winning candidates for city seats and thank you to all those that energized democracy by running!
I would also like to congratulate the Dispatch editors responsible for coverage and editorial comment. Your coverage of the election process has been fair and balanced and the staff has demonstrated a good handle on Gilroy’s voter concerns and insight to the strengths of each of our candidates. Your Nov. 8 editorial summary on the messages from this election is spot-on and hopefully will be a point of discussion or reflection as the new leadership prepares to begin working together.
Adding a few points to your summary, I have a couple of statements and questions for our newly elected officials.
Assuming the optimist role, Craig Gartman’s loss to Al Pinheiro may be the best of all outcomes for our community. We have the continuity and poise from Al but seated three new members and retain Craig’s seat on the council all with one clear mandate from the electorate. We expect a serious change in the dynamic of our administrators, mayor and council.
Folks, I am worried that we are frequently messing with the Generation X and Y…our kids and grand-kids. Unions; once bastions of equal pay for equal work, now find that protecting aging “baby boomer” groups is acceptable by deferring economic realities to younger workers who are doing the same manufacturing task at lower wages and substantially lower benefits. This is but one instance of a concerning direction for the legacy we are bequeathing future generations.
We need to be strict custodians of expenditures and vigilant to any deferrals to future taxpayers or inequities that potentially move economic realities to younger workers. Your taxpayer base is getting a headache from reports on public expenditures particularly for wages and benefits as they are out of step with the experience of the predominately private side experiences of the taxpayer. I believe it is advisable that we view our local government as having marginally survived “the best” of fiscal times. If we don’t improve on past performance, the consequences will be tougher to overcome as the probabilities move toward the potential of leaner times ahead.
Now for some questions to our elected officials:
Will there be a discussion/reflection on what messages were transmitted by this election?
Can you assure that wages and salaries of the public sector are reviewed against both private and public comps? We should be inquiring as to why inflationary pressures in the public sector appear to be out of step with the private sector. I can’t help but think that the portability of Calpers administrated pensions is having unintended impacts on the public side. Since pensions are now virtually non-existent on the private side, they do not have this component of competing working in their business models.
Do laws or policies exists that would come into play if we should experience an underfunded situation in our public benefit commitments due either to changing actuarial assumptions (living longer) or a sustained decline in the financial markets?
Since the objective of Measure A was to keep city revenue whole on technology shifts, are you committed to adjusting the tax rate to avoid a windfall gain to the city should the estimates move the collections beyond those intended by guidance from those supporting this measure?
Can you begin to highlight the cost of severances, recruiting cost and other buy-outs as a litmus to management performance? I am frequently amazed at reports of what has been considered a “necessary” expenditure to avoid legal entanglements. These giveaways are usually reflective of sloppy management whether on the private or public sector.
Can we negotiate with incoming businesses like we really have some cards in our hands? Growth for Gilroy is inevitable and I believe many of us are willing to wait for the right economic fit. I believe growth demand that we do not have to “buy” is far more agreeable to the will and desires of the people. I’ll guarantee that we would not be trying to understand why a Wal-Mart (Morgan Hill) situation evolved if “natural” economies drives the growth versus providing incentives for what amounts to premature expansions. These pushes for tax revenue that defer the infrastructure cost implications are only underscoring the fact that we are not living within our means.
Again, congratulations to all. We, the electorate, pray for courage, insight and success for your leadership terms and I know many of us are anxious to being challenged by the open communication message we have delivered and you will now attempt to execute.
Dennis Wise, Gilroy
South Valley teachers take columnist and her misguided viewpoints to task
Dear Editor,
This is in response to Ms. Cynthia Walker’s column “Teachers’ Salaries and One View of a Pie in the Face.” Let us first point out that her views of public education here in Gilroy seem to be based on hearsay or, at the very least, misconceptions.
She paints a picture that in the normal Gilroy Unified School District middle or high school classroom, disruptions are constant and background chat is the norm. Nothing can be further from the truth. Yes, students are called out for counseling, recognition, and of course, fire drills. However, student disruptions that keep a teacher from teaching altogether happen rarely.
Background chat? Let us share a comment by one of our South Valley Middle School teachers who wondered if maybe you heard our students talking about our new tennis courts, or the fact that at South Valley, they learn to swim. Perhaps you heard our students talking about one of the many trips they might take this year, including the 6th grade science camp trip? If so, they were indeed talking, sharing their enthusiasm and showing involvement in their own education. However, to think background chat is going on while the teacher is instructing is not at all the norm around here.
Ms. Walker, we are very confused as to why you said that Principal John Perales only cares about fundraising and not academics. If that were the case, why did SVMS grow 26 points on their API this past year? Why does he continually support collaboration and training for his staff and participate in this process himself as well?
Before you use your public venue to make comments such as those you made about Gilroy middle and high school classrooms’ and the students, staff, and administration at those sites, might we suggest that you visit our campuses and experience what goes on so that you can write from first-hand experience rather than conjecture.
Staff members with decades of experience at our middle school voiced their outrage saying that they have never heard of nor have they ever experienced the so-called “horror stories” that you purport have taken place. Why have they not seen you on their campuses? Where have you been to hear about those so-called “horror stories”, when the very people who are on those campuses for anywhere from 8 to 12 hours daily have never had nor heard of such experiences?
We are not saying there are never any unpleasant things that can and do happen on any campus, but we wish to dispel the impression that such things happen on a regular basis and go unaddressed by staff or administration. We here at SVMS enjoy the support of our parents, our students, and the administration. We have chosen to work in Gilroy, we have chosen to serve at our school sites, we have chosen to be teachers who strongly believe in supporting our students, our colleagues, and the highest of goals for all students here in the Gilroy educational community.
We do not understand how someone who has never been on our campus can tell the public she “knows what goes on”. Please make yourself known to us on a personal basis, visit our campus. We would like to see you use your column for constructive, not destructive purposes.
Carol Marques, Carol MacDonald, Ginger Gallup, Marcy Connal, Michelle Cameron, Cheryl Farrie, Mary Fabing, Lacey Faulkner, Jo Ann Sullivan, Rickey Thompson, Jan Cameron, Kristin Weiss, Louie Godinez, Diane Bowlby, Pat Carrejo, Darmen Kotto, Annette Ghezzi, Sharon Redford, Jamie Feci, Jennifer Saeng, Stella Hay, Nancy Frizell, Jami Reynolds, Dolores Burdick, Jennifer Clem, Richard Lust, Jenny Belcher, John Perales, Shawna Walker, Theresa Faus, Julia Popa and Sharon Avina, South Valley Middle School staff members
Student Election Day volunteer inspired by a unique opportunity
Dear Editor,
My daughter was one of the high school seniors who worked the polls on election day. It was disappointing to see the Dispatch and a school board member criticize this opportunity. It seems to me that the Dispatch and board member are focused on the wrong kids.
My daughter certainly did not do this for the money – $125 for the 18 she hours she committed to, for training and work comes to $6.94 per hour, less then she makes at her part-time job. Megan committed to this because through her teachers at Gilroy High School, Ms. Enriquez, Mr. Yafai, Ms. Hockemeyer, and Ms. Pratt she has developed an interest in social studies, history and government. Enough so to consider a political science degree in college.
All of the kids who worked at the polls had to have at least a 2.5 grade point average (higher then is required to participate in athletics) and as the article stated all were above a 3.0. GPA It would seem that these are the kids you would want out in the community representing Gilroy High School.
I think it is time for the Dispatch and the school board to stop advocating roadblocks for the kids who are doing the right things in school. Students are given a goal and if they meet those goals they receive opportunities. If you don’t meet those goals then the opportunity does not exist. Kind of like the real world.
The Dispatch and the board member should spend their time trying to reach the far too many kids with the GPA south of 2.0. Or how about the 80 kids in Saturday school. Not to mention, the 25 to 30 kids, on an average day, that do the detention walk after school.
Finally, the Dispatch bemoans the fact that the taxpayer is being double dipped, as the school still receives the average daily attendance money from the state. I have read the Dispatch opinion column enough to know that if the school did not receive the ADA funds, the Dispatch would think that is a problem, too. You can’t have it both ways.
I am proud my daughter wanted to participate in the election. Although it was a long day, she “enjoyed visiting with the voters and it felt good to be part of the process.” By the way, did anyone from the editorial board volunteer at the polls? I think I know the answer.
Charlie Hamik, Gilroy
Editor’s note: At least three members of the Dispatch editorial board have volunteered at the polls in the past. Despite the snide final remark, the Golden Quill is awarded for a well-written letter.
