We love to hear from readers. If you’re interested in submitting a letter to the editor, please email editor Bleys Rose at b.****@so********.com.
The problem with CBOCs
EDITOR: In the campaign to win voters’ approval of Measure A, the West Sonoma County High School District’s proposed $91 million bond measure, proponents seeking to assuage voters’ general distrust of government argue that a Citizens Bond Oversight Committee (CBOC) will ensure bond monies are not diverted to improper purposes. Nonsense!
The school district board of trustees may very well use bond funds as intended. Then again, it may not. In either event, the existence of a CBOC will have no bearing on the outcome.
CBOCs are indeed required by the enabling legislation authorizing school districts to place bond measures before district voters. CBOCs are required to have representatives of various community groups, including the local taxpayers’ association. I routinely receive requests from school districts throughout Sonoma County seeking one of our members to join their ranks. I have served on several of these committees myself.
The problem with CBOCs is that they simply have no authority. Their approval is neither needed nor sought before bond projects are planned, bid and built. Nor do CBOCs have any veto authority over these projects. They do meet periodically and review unaudited spreadsheets purporting to detail expenditures of bond funds, but committee members are not typically trained or prepared to properly analyze such information. And further, because the information presented has not been audited or verified by any independent third party, there is no way for committee members to verify its accuracy.
Waving the CBOC flag before voters is proponents’ attempt to distract us from the very real issues facing the district for which the board of trustees has no solution. Student enrollment is plummeting. From a high of 3,000 students in 1999-2000 to a projected enrollment of 1,526 in 2021-22, the board of trustees has yet to devise a plan for its buildings and facilities needs going forward.
Before asking voters to commit themselves to another $91 million dollars of new bond debt, money intended for the construction of new buildings and the refurbishing of existing ones, the board of trustees owes voters an explanation of its facilities needs for a shrinking enrollment. Spending money on buildings no longer needed makes no sense at all. Until the board of trustees does its job, we recommend a No vote on Measure A.
Dan Drummond, Executive Director
Sonoma County Taxpayers Association
Accountability and oversight
EDITOR: As the current chairman of the West Sonoma County Union High School District Bond Oversight Committee, I take exception to what the Sonoma County Taxpayers Association stated to reporter Bleys Rose about the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee for the high school district. For them to basically say our committee is a ruse and a shill with regards to oversight of the districts’ bond measure(s) is nothing but far from the truth.
Those of us on the committee take this job serious! We review every expenditure and also are made aware of the plans that are in motion for spending remaining bond dollars. We are a small group that tries to meet at least twice a year (State requires meeting once a year), we report out to the board yearly regarding our oversight as is required with regards to our approval (or not) of how the funds were disbursed.
I can assure all voters that no monies go to salaries as is stated in the wording of the bond measure and that the board does everything it can to meet the needs of all stakeholders. Many meetings are held every year with anyone interested able to share their thoughts and feelings on how the board should be and/or is spending the bond money. Great time and attention to this is taken by our board to be sure as many voices are heard and monies are spent in the areas with the greatest need.
As was stated by the reporter, yes I do support Measure A! I would ask every voter in our district to please vote YES as well! Are not our students worth it? Is not their safety important? Having buildings that leak, with dry rot exposed is not what I would consider a safe place to learn. We are exposing our children to a myriad of health issues if these conditions continue.
Please note: the state provides very little money towards the upkeep of our buildings which are pushing an average of 50-plus years old. Many of Analy’s are over 80 years old. Do we not maintain our own homes better than this? Our children spend 1/3 of their day in our schools, they deserve a clean, safe and environmentally friendly place to learn. These students are our future, we need to provide them with facilities of the future.
Jeanne Bassett Fernandes
Sebastopol
A sincere candidate
EDITOR: We are so excited to have met and now to support a truly inspiring leader! This dynamite candidate will be on our June 5th ballot running for a most important position, that of Sonoma County Sheriff.
We are so moved by John Mutz’s sincerity, experience and professionalism, and his commitment to all the people of Sonoma County – both those in the department and the community at large. He will promote a refreshing approach to dealing with the many challenges facing our justice system in the years to come.
John Mutz is a team player who listens to the concerns of the public about law enforcement and will ensure that the outcomes are fair to all. He can bring change which may be necessary in the department and he will encourage staff and community members to work together bringing creative ideas to resolve conflicts and make us all proud! We know he is the man to for the job. PLEASE VOTE FOR JOHN MUTZ as our next Sonoma County Sheriff. He will not disappoint us!!
Heidi Gillen, former aide to county and state legislators
Bob Gillen, retired chief of Sonoma County probation office
Sebastopol
Measure A a necessity
EDITOR: Much of the Analy High School campus is the same as it was when I graduated in 1966. In fact, much of it dates back to when my mother graduated in 1941. El Molino, where my daughters attended in the mid 1990’s, dates back to 1964. Both campuses are in the need of repairs, which Measure A would address.
Those repairs are well described in the May 17 issue of Sonoma West. But the Sonoma County Taxpayers Association is against this measure, saying that further study is needed, and there would be no oversight for the money raised by the bond, although both of those issues were answered in the May 17 article. The association also states that an increase of $150 in property taxes resulting from the bond will discourage young families with children from moving into the district. Wrong. It is not $150 that discourages families, it is the high cost of housing here. Period.
As far as I am concerned the Taxpayer’s Association is coming out against higher learning in west Sonoma County. It seems that it would prefer let the two high schools fall into such a state of disrepair, they would be unsafe, and useless. That does not even make sense to me as a taxpayer.
I don’t know about enrollment projections, but I offer a personal experience. My Rotary Club just put on free swim lessons for a month, for all Sebastopol area second graders. We had the largest number of students, 400, in the almost 15 years I have been helping run the program. And the largest number of volunteers, over 130, who have an interest in the future of our children. I want those kids to have a good high school to look forward to. I got a great education at Analy, as did my mother, and as did my daughters at El Molino. I am willing to see that we continue the tradition of our distinguished schools for those who come after us.
Greg Jacobs
Sebastopol
