The last paragraph is a howler. Makes you wonder what one would be for these people! Or whether it has become just a game of winning for them. No matter if it’s really needed.
Consolidating with the March 5 Los Angeles Community College district’s board election — an option presented at a special Burbank Unified school board meeting Thursday night — would cost the district $110,000, but carries the risk of lower voter turnout. “There are many people in the community that recognize that the community college election in this community is not an election where we have high levels of participation,” school board President Larry Applebaum said. He favored two city election dates: Feb. 26 and April 9. “We’ve had arguments both ways,” said Assistant Supt. Christine Statton. “There is no agenda. My goal is to pass the bond for the good of the school district.”
Oh, that’s all?
That last sentence shows a big agenda, my agenda is vote no on any bond.
Has anyone else caught how all these news stories about the school board always seem to quote this Apple-fritter guy ? What do the rest of those members of the board do ? It looks like Apple-fritters has just taken the whole thing over as a one man show from the news stories these days. I need to start watching the meetings on television because nothing they do seems to be above board at this point.
Seriously, the guy never shuts up.
That would not be bad if he actually said something.
NO. To another bond the answer is NO. The schools have a budget shortfall and bonds are not even designed to address a budget shortfall so Board Member Applebaum needs to get off the bond soap box, the answer is NO. I honestly don’t care what Board Member Dilibert offered or how much he can bring to help pass a bond the answer is still NO BOND. This school board needs to understand we are still paying for their last bond.
I agree.
1) We just had a big bond issue, where they promised us that some of the money was still going to be around now for deferred maintenance,
2) The BUSD also got over $100 million from the state for these facilities, extra, beyond that of the bond issue, and which they lied about in the late 90s and said was not available (and thus we need to get the bond passed),
3) They have not defined where this money is going, because– just like last time– they want a BLANK CHECK.
We all saw how they misspent the last money on such horrible aesthetics. So is it really time for more?
Rumors are that the school board wants a bond to pay for all the last bond work which is already falling apart. Didn’t they promise the voters complete accountability with the last bond and money put away every year for maintenance so we would not need to go for a bond all over again ? Unfortunately some of us who voted for the last bond remember the promises from back then.
Yep. We were assured it would last for years, with lots of money set aside for deferred maintenance.
The last bond election in 1997 also had an ‘action plan’ set up ahead of time, to let the voters know where the money would be going. They never followed it of course (they overspent at Burroughs by about 4 times what the action plan had set out, because Burroughs bitched that BHS was getting all of the good stuff), but at least they had a prescription.
Along with the $110 million or so of the bond money, the BUSD also got $100 + million from the state. The total facilities expenditures were something like $230 million. Gordon gave out the number a few months ago.
If everyone saw some of the crappy materials that I saw at the school you would know why they need another bond to replace it. Stuff was breaking the first week it was getting used thats how crappy it was.
Or that new stairway at Miller– where the contractor miscalculated the rise, and so had to make one of the steps several inches higher?
And when the concrete floor in the same building started to crumble apart because it had been thinned out during construction, the district tried to claim it was a “water table” problem?
And don’t even get me started on BHS. A beautiful, quiet, well-designed 1920s progressive facility (that had been deliberately let go over the years) was converted into a street-top prison yard. Walled-in courtyard and all.
It’s like the kids are in jail. Lunch time’s an ugly sight. All they need in there are weight benches and the look would be complete.
What they did to BHS is worse than what Glendale did to Hoover in the late 60s– and that’s saying a lot. It’s like Burbank modeled the school after Glendale High!
Hey maybe Mr Dilibert can add guard towers and razor wire to Burbank High. You are right it already has that prison feel to it and add a few guards, guard towers and some razor wire and it will be complete. The feel of that school is just plain creepy.
How about the hardwood floor i the junior high auditorium that was destroyed when the brand new roof leaked all over it. That’s what our last bond did, restore hard wood flooring and then put an inferior roof on and destroy the flooring. What oversight ???
beautiful.
My friend told me that he heard the police and their police union have all kinds of plans for Burbank right now. He said what he heard is that it all is connected to controlling our upcoming election. So he said they made some kind of deal with Mayor Golonski and Councilman Talamantes to support them for reelection if they get rid of the police chief. They made a deal with the school board members Bunch. Kemp and Applebaum to help out passing a bond if their guy Dilbert gets to run the schools. It sounds like the police and their union is out to control our city and that I think is bad news for our community. I suspect there is a reason they have all these plans but I also suspect their reasons are bad. I think this next election we need to pay close attention to who and what the police union supports and vote against them. These are the people who have cost us all this money in legal costs. I am really suspicious why the police union would want a school bond so there must be control that they are after.
They’re delusional if they think that their support of anything is going to help the thing in question. They have no built up ‘warm and fuzzy’ reputation in the community.
If they get behind the bond issue it’ll surely fail. At best, voters will think it has something to do with the police department. At worst, they’ll wonder, “So what’s in it for them…?”
Can anyone tell me exactly what this Lt John Dilibert has command and or oversight of at the police department and how long has he been a lt. ?
Come on now let”s not pretend that there is not a whole lot of racism and bigotry in the official circles of Burbank. That’s part of why there is so much nepotism and that so obvious family mentality. It’s an us against them mentality in the police agency by the inner click
I am very confused about all of this. My understanding was that the Burbank Teachers Associaion endorsed Steve Ferguson for the vacant school board seat. Just why would the police union even get involved and stand in the way of an endorsement by the actual teachers union ? It seems they very badly wanted this police officer on our school board but what I am not understanding is why ? Why would they want this so badly that they would offer deals and stand in the way of the actual union that speaks for the teachers ? There must be something in this for the police union or they would not even sneak in behind the scene and contradict our teachers union. So what exactly is it that they want from our schools ? Note I said want because I don’t believe they have anything to give so they must be out to take something from the schools with all of this secret deal making with our school board members.
The BPOA is in a vengeful mood. They see some power vacuums coming up — such as the new chief pick — and so they’re trying to get control, some influence, just for the sake of it. They’re tired of seeing others set the agenda, and vengeance shall be theirs at last.
It’s pure arrogance. And shamelessness.
This of course is what created these messes in the first place. But cops now think that they’re the military, and the military thinks they’re everything. So if they aren’t running things, who shall?
Maybe the police union sees themselves as the morality police or they just plain want to further their agenda as a club.
I am really upset about the idea of bringing a police presence into our school board. It will not make our schools safer it will create a police state mentality that has no place in our schools. I am so disappointed with the school board officials who voted to do this. The Burbank Police Department has a questionable reputation that does not belong in the schools.
I agree. It’s way too much commingling, and could also present legal problems.
State law has always had a very strict city govt/school district firewall. For example, they both got in trouble back in the 90s for having the city pay the board members’ car allowances. You can’t do that. Everything has to stay separate unless there are shared resources.
About this idea of another school bond I have a few questions. Mrs Kutka came from the school board to the treasurers office. She left a school district saying the are poor and need another bond from us. Now she is the treasurer and there are all these police costs and worse court settlements. This woman is now the treasurer so why isn’t she calling a press conference and letting us know how much the settlement and police are costing us ? Does she plan another bond on our properties to pay all the police costs ? She sure seems to move from place to place just before financial woes begin. She is treasurer so why isn’t she reporting to us where all our money is going ?
Good point Ken. The treasurer should know where the money goes so the treasurer should know what settlements cost and since the treasurer is normally elected then the treasurer reports to us as voters and not to the council as hide and seek players. It would be a good idea for the media and the public to begin demanding some accountability from the treasurer.
If you don’t think Kukta had a role to do with who got appointed you are sorely mistaken. She’s rigged races before against good candidates.
I’m proud of what Reynolds did at that last board meeting. My respect for her has grown tremendously over the years as she has stepped out of Kukta’s clutches. Kukta goes to the front of the line on this BPOA rumor. My guess is that she negotiated terms and other board members agreed to them that way “they had no clue about any deal”. There’s no way that “upstanding” Kukta would ever allow a gay guy to take her spot on the board. She lost my respect many years ago and deserves all of the consequences that are heading her way