I'm a teacher and I'm for schools and kids and all but really enough is enough. For a school district that pays their teachers the highest salaries in the state you would think the district could budget for ongoing maintenance of their facilities without "going to the well" for more. Between bond measures, and parcel taxes enough is enough.

I'm all for well-financed local schools, but using a bond measure to deal with cash flow problems brought on by the recession seems like a misuse of what bonds are intended for. Don't know all the answers, but it seems like the first step is to cut administrative jobs by the same percentage as job losses in the private sector.

The bond is not to address cash flow issues. It's for long-term capital improvements. A side benefit of adding the energy upgrades (solar, etc.) is that is will free up around $400K per year from general fund money that is currently being used to pay the energy bills. But that is not the purpose of the bond. The schools are almost at maximum capacity now, and there are big enrollment increases coming up from the elementary districts. They need space for the kids who'll be flooding the campuses in the next 10 years.

Also, regarding the comments about salaries: The teacher should know that the pot of money that pays for salaries is not the pot that is used for buildings. Ed Code pretty much dictates what dollars can be spent on what. And you'd probably have to stop paying the teachers and administrators completely for a couple of years to have enough cash to do a facility upgrade. Bonds are how school districts pay for the buildings. It's not regular maintenance, it's upgrades and additions.

So if you want to take issue with the salaries, that's fine, but it's a different discussion.