City of Eugene Voters' Pamphlet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MEASURE NO. 20-90 MEASURE NO. 20-90 ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF BALLOT MEASURE 20-90 The current state of school funding continues to threaten the excellence of Eugene public schools. Money that was once raised through local taxes to operate local schools is now shipped to Salem where state legislators decide who gets the money and how much each district receives, In 1999, the legislature granted school districts a local option - a limited opportunity to keep some local money at home for local schools. The NO PERSONS APPLIED FOR THE state has put strict limits on how much the district can request and how it VOTERS' PAMPHLET COMMITTEE is spent. In May, 2000, Eugene 4J school district voters passed a local TO WRITE AN ARGUMENT IN option which has pa~d for the equivalent of about 70 full-t~me teachers each year. OPPOSITION TO BALLOT MEASURE 20-90. In June, 2005, this funding expires. Measure 20-90 will renewthis funding and allow us to maintain current school programs and staffing levels. Funds raised by Measure 20-90 are essential to maintaining our high quality schools. It is important to renew the levy to prevent 4J from having to make $6 million more in cuts to education programs. The money w~ll be used specifically for classrooms, textbooks, and teachers. The district has about the same number of students as in 1991, but has cut 15% of the regular teaching and certified staff (such as librarians and counselors) and about 35% of administrative and central services staff. Additional cuts are not acceptable. Quality students are the future quality citizens of Eugene. Preserving the classroom ~s st~ll the most important th~ng we can do ~n educabon. Good schools build good communities. Please vote Yes on Measure 20- 90. Prepared by Voters' Pamphlet Committee in Support of Measure 20-90 Eric Forrest, Co-chair, Yes for Schools Steve Korth, Co-chair, Yes for Schools Beth Gemt, Eugene 4J School Board (Th~s space prowded ~n accordance w~th EC 2.994(1)(b) ) The pnntmg of this argument does not consbtute an endorsement by the C~ty of Eugene, nor does the City of Eugene warrant the accuracy or truth of any statements made 17