.
News Alert
Bomb Squad Determined Suspicious Object Near…

New Haven Boosters, Schools Foundation Launch Donation Drive for Co-Curricular Programs

With the failure of Measure H, the New Haven Boosters Association and New Haven Schools Foundation are calling on residents who voted “yes” to donate $180 or more to directly aide co-curricular activities.

Updated 9:04 a.m.

Measure H may have , but New Haven supporters aren’t going down without a fight.

The New Haven Boosters Association and New Haven Schools Foundation are calling on anyone who wants to help — regardless if they voted "Yes" or "No" on Measure H — to donate at least the $180 proposed by the parcel tax measure to directly aide co-curricular activities.

“Measure H has indeed failed and that means we find ourselves in desperate need of outside funding to ensure our co-curricular programs stay in place,” read a note posted on the Boosters website.

The Boosters are also hoping those who voted “No” but said they would donate $180 to support activities keep good on their word. (Even money to the Boosters.

“We want to raise as much money as possible,” said Michael Ritchie, co-founder of the New Haven Boosters Association and a New Haven Board of Education trustee, speaking on behalf of the Boosters. “We encourage families to donate anything from the $180 in the proposed annual parcel to whatever amount they can afford.”

The donation drive, which launched Thursday afternoon, is part of the Boosters and Foundation’s pledge to raise $100,000 to contribute to sports, music and other co-curricular programs throughout the 2012-13 school year. The will be the first contribution to the fund, Ritchie said.

“We’d love to do more if possible,” Ritchie said. “We’ve been approached to see if additional money can be raised for libraries for the district, and we’ll be taking that into consideration.”

Last year, the Boosters and Foundation made a similar pledge and raised $100,000 for the 2011-12 school year. Half of the money came from the Foundation’s various events and programs, with the rest from Boosters events, such as the annual Race to Save Student Activities and 10-10-10 fundraising program, according to Ritchie.

Those interested in supporting the Boosters and Foundatin’s pledge can make a tax deductible donation via the Foundation's website at www.nhsfoundation.com or mail a donation to:

NHBA, c/o New Haven Schools Foundation
33377 Western Avenue
Union City, CA  94587

More fundraising efforts and events are currently being planned. Stay tuned to the Boosters website and Facebook page for the latest updates. Any questions may be directed to info@newhavenboosters.org.

“We’re moving forward,” Ritchie said. “We know we have work to do and we’re hoping the community will support the co-curricular programs like they did last year.”

Teachers, classified staff in contract negotiations

Meanwhile, teachers and staff are trying to do what they can to minimize the impact of the budget cuts the district faces next school year, a district official said.

The district faces up to $12 million in cuts for the 2012-13 school year. Measure H would have offset the cuts by raising $3 million a year for the next four years.

A yielded only a total of 7,852 votes, according to the latest figures released by the Alameda County Registrar of Voters Thursday afternoon. Just over 62 percent of the votes (4,906 votes) were in favor of the measure, which was still required to win.

In the wake of the measure’s failure, teachers are considering changes to their contracts, which will be voted on next week, according to district spokesman Rick La Plante. Negotiations are also underway with classified staff, he said.

“We’re trying to move ahead,” La Plante said. “It’s not going to be easy.”

-------

Like Union City Patch on Facebook | Follow Union City Patch on Twitter | Get Free Union City Patch Newsletters

Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 12:56 PM
Tim on tyranny: "It's certainly tyrannical to allow people who would not be subjected to a tax to have a vote on that tax.." Tim on Prop 29 (a tax he wouldn't pay): "I voted YES on 29..." I don't see any exception case in your original statement for optional behavior. In fact, from your statement here and your original statement on 29 it's clear you want to use the tax code to enforce your own personal position on smoking on to other people. You want to impose your choices on to them. Doesn't sound very Libertarian to me at all.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 01:03 PM
How does any of this apply to our kids and our schools or Measure H? You guys get on here and bring up national politics on local issues. What do federal government departments have to do with a school funding vote?
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 02:23 PM
Looking at this again, no, owning your own house is not a 'necessity'. It's an option. Just like smoking. So even though you didn't specify optional behavior as an exception case it wouldn't matter, since it's optional in either case. I'm not the one who has a problem with your vote. I only point out the hypocrisy. It's Tamerlane who thinks your vote was wrong and that you were taken in by the lure of tyranny.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 04:14 PM
In fact, having read Rand and looking at the ballot a YES vote on 29 was the single most anti-Libertarian stance on the ballot. Tim voted YES to using the government impose his own personal will on what he would call a 'targeted minority'. To tell the minority what they could and couldn't do with their own bodies. And the bureaucracy that would have created? An acceptable casualty in furtherance of his personal vendetta against a legal American agro-business that supports local jobs. It's a good thing, from the Libertarian/Conservative perspective, that there were true conservative voters like Tamerlane who made up for Tim's costly mistake.
Tamerlane June 15, 2012 at 04:55 PM
In Tim's defense, from some of his posts, I have inferred that he is still on the younger side. He may not yet have completely abandoned his youthful ideals in exchange for truth and reality. I remember some misguided notions I held back in my own youth. As his thinking continues to mature, I would expect he will develop an ever clearer idea of what liberty and justice truly is in a civil society. Cigarette tax notwithstanding, I have been pretty impressed with his knowledge of public affairs and his general ability to interpret the true impact and potential unintended consequences of various official actions. I am glad that Tim contributes his ideas to the discussion.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 05:08 PM
That's very forgiving of you. You clearly have a better understanding of Libertarianism and Conservative principles than he does. But really, I have to say, how is it even possible that a person with even the most cursory understanding of Libertarianism would make this mistake on 29? On it's face it's simply against every tenet of liberty and justice!
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 05:31 PM
Sorry Tamerlane, but really this shows no understanding of either Libertarianism or Conservatism. Prop 29 is clearly a Bill of Attainder which is unconstitutional under Article 1 Section 9. You know that as well as I do. And clearly Tim is on the wrong side here. He is clearly targeting a minority here is service of his own personal vendetta against the cigarette companies.
Davis June 15, 2012 at 05:51 PM
I need some help understanding alot of this stuff, so...... "Tim voted YES to using the government impose his own personal will on what he would call a 'targeted minority''. (Prop 29) He is a Hypocrite right?, OK got that part, now...... We have Senior Citizens who may or may not own a Parcel of Land In the affected area, who know that they would be exempted, and Vote YES, What are they? I am a Senior Parcel owner and Voted NO!
TruthOverDare June 15, 2012 at 05:58 PM
Jack, I think what it really shows is that Tim, unlike yourself, is not an extremist. Most of us who are not to the extreme left or extreme right do venture to the center when a good case is made. He does make a good case that "Proposition 29 on the other hand leaves a very clear choice, pay or don't smoke." I voted No on 29 but Tim's point has changed my mind and I would vote Yes if there is a similar proposition in the future. On the other hand, having read the ACA cover to cover, I am a strong supported of HealtCare Reform. I think it is the best healthcare for a capitalist system. I don't believe health insurance is a "product". Buying medicine for your sick child is not the same as buying him/her a candy bar. But I am venturing into a much more controversial discussion. I am sure Tim and I can agree to disagree on ACA.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 06:00 PM
Without knowing how they voted on 29 one cannot say. What I'm pointing out here is Tim's clear hypocrisy in voting against H but for 29. As Tamerlane clearly indicates the only way a true conservative would vote on 29 is against it. Tamerlane is willing to forgive Tim because of his youth. But a tax is a tax regardless of how well intentioned it is. In addition Tim has made the 'targeted minority' argument a key pillar of his opposition to H. Prop 29 is clearly a Bill of Attainder against a 'targeted minority'. His justification on 29 had more to do with a vendetta against the cigarette companies and his own personal sentiment than a principled policy stance. A true conservative votes on principle and not sentiment.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 06:07 PM
So you not only want to tell people that they cannot smoke, you also want to force them to buy health insurance? You sound more like a progressive than a conservative. Have you read the Constitution, Article 1 Section 9? Prop 29 is clearly unconstitutional on it's face. You cannot simply tax a minority because you personally disagree with their behavior. It's called a 'Bill of Attainder' and it's on it's face un-Constitutional.
Tim June 15, 2012 at 06:57 PM
Captain Jack says: Looking at this again, no, owning your own house is not a 'necessity'. It's an option. Really? So, you think that for the renter that the landlord will eat this tax? No, he's going to pass it on to his tenants. Everyone who lives in a home (other than your freeloading friends) pays. Again, housing is a necessity, not a choice... unless you're Jack during his protest days of the 1960s. Ever go to the supermarket Jack? Cigarettes, alcohol, and paper goods... all taxed. When's the last time you paid sales tax on milk, break, or other staple foods?
Davis June 15, 2012 at 07:13 PM
I think everyone should aquaint themselves with the definition of Parcel, as in Parcel Tax. The Parcel maps are available on the Alameda County Website. I was very surprised to see that some apartment complexes were on parcel, the Rite Aid shopping center is one parcel, and that the Union Landing Parcel was in fact about 5 parcels. I know for sure that my Parcel is a Parcel, all I have to do is look at my Property Tax statement. I would love to share my 1977 tax statement to the 2011 statement. Oh, boy, the add-ons, and while I am at it, those add-ons with the addition of the Sales tax increase essentially doomed to passage of Meas. H. If it was an additional tax of any kind, for any purpose, it probably would have failed. (my opinion), Are the Administration and the School Board even thinking that they have messed up with purpose and timing?, (That consulting firm should be real proud)
Davis June 15, 2012 at 07:44 PM
before the newly annointed spell checker makes a comment, I realize it is "acquaint"
TruthOverDare June 15, 2012 at 07:52 PM
Does anyone know if citizens can put a ballot measure to revoke a sales tax increase? Given the latest wave of distrust in Union City government entities0, I think that a successful revocation is highly likely.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 08:41 PM
So now there is another exception to your simple "It's certainly tyrannical to allow people who would not be subjected to a tax to have a vote on that tax.." rule. Now it's ok if there is already a tax on it? Have you thought that through? We pay property taxes already, a portion of which goes to the school, so given your own logic then Measure H is just fine. Listen, I don't have to fight this fight with you. Tamerlane has already stated that your YES vote on 29 was a mistake. Or a youthful transgression.
Tim June 15, 2012 at 09:13 PM
Jack, I don't care that you or anyone else on this forum thinks. Clearly a true Conservative would have voted no on 29. I never claimed to be a down the line Conservative. More often than not I agree with the Conservative base. yes, Prop 29 was an exception. I also part ways with the right wing base over social issues. I am for legalization of marijuana. I am for allowing gay marriage, etc. etc. etc. I know we already pay property taxes. That's the point! You want a new, separate tax, which is what H was about. Aside from that fact, I'm pointing out my raionale behind supporting 29 vs not supporting H. I am using the example of what is and isn't taxes in the supermarket as an example. I'm sorry that you can't understand this simple point.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 09:22 PM
Your not even being a consistent in your own statements though. You say: "It's certainly tyrannical to allow people who would not be subjected to a tax to have a vote on that tax.." You don't smoke. Now instead of just admitting that your position is inconsistent, you come up with excuse after excuse for why your vote on 29 didn't fall into this statement. Do you support this: "It's certainly tyrannical to allow people who would not be subjected to a tax to have a vote on that tax.." Or not?
TruthOverDare June 15, 2012 at 09:50 PM
Jack, what you followers consider "inconsistent", the rest of us consider "independent". Prop 29 and Measure H are completely independent of each other. A completely different set of parameters are weighed while making a decision on which way to vote on each one of them.
Tim June 15, 2012 at 10:02 PM
Again, it's a choice. I choose not to smoke. Anyone can choose whether or not to smoke and then pay or not pay a tax based on that choice. Are you suggesting that one can choose whether or not to live in a house or apartment as opposed to being homeless?
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 10:03 PM
So I see, there is another exception clause on this rule that states that it only applies until it doesn't? Gotta say, it's getting kinda hard to track all of these exceptions to a pretty direct statement. As far as 29 and Measure H being different, certainly that is true. 29 is a punitive tax on personal behavior. Tim voted for it because he has a personal vendetta against a lawful domestic agro-business that provides substantial jobs in this country.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 10:05 PM
And again, where in this statement do you say anything about choice? "It's certainly tyrannical to allow people who would not be subjected to a tax to have a vote on that tax.." I don't see choice anywhere in there. If anything your choice to not to smoke should keep you from voting on a smoking tax, according to your own rule.
Jack Herrington June 15, 2012 at 11:08 PM
"I don't care that you or anyone else on this forum thinks." I know you didn't care what I thought. But if I'm Tamerlane, YouCantHandleTheTruth, or Davis, and I've been covering your back for months, and then you say that. Wow. Really? Nothing Tamerlane, or any of these guys, could say will ever change your mind on anything? YouCantHandleTheTruth was apparently swayed by your Prop 29 argument and now says he would vote your way. Sad that the door only swings one way.
Tim June 16, 2012 at 05:12 AM
@ Jack... I meant I don't care what YOU think, but I didn't want to offend you and call you out... wouldn't want you running to the city council to "shut down the Patch" LOL
Jack Herrington June 16, 2012 at 05:28 AM
So I tell you about what Tamerlane said. You then say you don't care what anyone says. At which point I call you on it. And you tell me that you only meant me? We are supposed to buy that? That's the best you have? Why don't you just apologize to your friends?
Tim June 16, 2012 at 07:42 AM
I'm sorry to anyone who I may have offended. Everyone's opinion is of course welcomed and valued. I care deeply about what everyone has to say, especially you Jack.
TruthOverDare June 16, 2012 at 08:28 AM
Me too Jack. You are absolutely right about everything on every matter. Thank you for opening our eyes. You should run for president! Everyone will vote for you.
Jack Herrington June 16, 2012 at 02:14 PM
Wow, two consecutive comments without name calling or insults! Keep up the good work!
Davis June 16, 2012 at 04:39 PM
Good morning Jack, It is still early! By the way, What are your Political aspirations?
Jack Herrington June 16, 2012 at 05:42 PM
I'm a morning person. Political aspirations? None. I work for a living. ;-)

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something