Comments so far on this story:

1. Frances O'Neill Zimmerman wrote on May 7, 2008 12:26 PM:
"Mitz Lee is an intelligent, practical, responsible and community-minded member of the Board of Education. I support her re-election. Questioning her personal commitment to classroom teachers is a ludicrous campaign-season diversion from the harsh realities now facing Lee and her four Board colleagues. We need Mitz Lee to continue on the Board of Education at this tough time. Public education cannot be systematically improved unless its funding is dependably regular and sufficient from year to year. (One good suggestion has been a parcel tax to smooth out the dips.) Presently we have a vicious cycle of boom and bust: national economy falters; state revenue declines (worse shortfall now than originally announced by Governor); less money flows from state to local public schools; local school boards face budget deficits and must cut costs; local school costs are predominantly people -- ergo devastating layoffs."

2. Citizen wrote on May 7, 2008 1:43 PM:
"I think that's exactly the idea - dissuading young people from going into public education in hopes that it will dry up and be replaced by private education."

3. Billy Bob Henry wrote on May 7, 2008 6:11 PM:
"Frances O'Neill Zimmerman, CA does not need a "parcel tax". We have numerous bond issues every year on the local level supporting education, in addition we have more than HALF of the general fund money going to education via prop. 98. CA teachers are the highest paid in the nation-making on average $45/hour in cash and another $25/hour in benefits. As for your statement that we should find a way to stop the bust and boom cycles of the economy-Arnold did exactly that with his ballot props in 2005, guess who lined up against it-teacher unions. So your statement that we need to do something about the boom and bust is just a scam to try to siphon off more tax dollars into a sinking ship. We don't need to privatize education-we just need to make it accountable-which it is not currently- nor at anytime in the past."

4. FO'NZ wrote on May 7, 2008 10:41 PM:
"BBH: California public schools cannot be run like this much longer. If people care as much about public education as they claim to -- and, by the way, there is no such thing as "bond issues every year on the local level" -- they would ante up to pay for a properly-designed parcel tax for local schools and local children. It's called taking care of our own. If you are recommending a more rigorous system for certifying teachers, similar to the State Bar exam, I am all for it. But our teachers are not the "highest paid in the nation," though they should be. Don't talk to me about Ahnuld, the "education Governor," and don't bother to slam teacher unions either. They are both so beside the point. Our futures depend on the kids we educate today; it's important we do it well."

5. Judy Ki wrote on May 8, 2008 7:00 AM:
"It is too bad that Mitz Lee decided to jump ship and run for City Council (District 5) last summer! Nothing wrong with having political ambition, just don't tell me that she is so dedicated to our schools! Just because she changed her mind after having difficulty raising funds to run against DeMaio, doesn't mean that everybody else should then bow out to make way for her! Dr. Evans worked hard on building his grassroots campaign and is an outstanding person to take care of our kids!"

6. Edgar wrote on May 8, 2008 8:07 AM:
"FONZie say: "Spend, spend, spend on education. Makes no matter what we spend on, as long as a good chunk of that money goes into the pockets of our hard-working, brilliant and polite teachers -- straight out of the bottom 5 percent of East Dumb Fooie State Teachers College." The two important things in public education are 1) that teachers get paid lots of money, with minimum qualifications and work requirements, and 2) that fresh young minds are quickly and irrevocably molded in the Group-Think mindset of socialism as practised in the People's Republic of California."

7. zollner wrote on May 8, 2008 2:51 PM:
"Edger, Do you have any idea what the starting salery is for first year teachers? What was your remark, the most important things are that teachers get paid a lot of money. Please enlighten us serfs about how much teachers get paid before you state your uninformed opinion. Do you have any facts to back this up? I'm waiting with bated breath for your reply."

8. PP wrote on May 8, 2008 4:08 PM:
"Why does Los Angeles Unified School district currently have a Project Labor Agreement in place discouraging 85% of the construction work force from bidding / working on it's projects? Why does our public school system provide an education to non citizens? Why are "undocumented immigrants" entitled to in state tuition paying less than a college student moving here from Arizona? Why is there such a need for ESL classes and are the people attending them here legally? Should the tax payers of California subsidize schools in third world countries or just provide an education for those who manage to get here? Tell me again how much more money you need."

9. FO'NZ wrote on May 8, 2008 4:38 PM:
"I say we need to educate all the kids before us to the highest standard, as if we believe they are our future. That will mean many innovative strategies, well-trained and compensated teachers, the smallest classes, more time on task -- and a lot more funding. Why shouldn't this state/nation be pre-eminent in public education rather than cyclically so desperate and embattled? We have NEVER made public education a priority: we always manage to find reasons not to: Stupid, rude kids and lazy free-loading teachers with those summers off -- not with my tax dollar! We will reap what we sow -- that's what I think. As for first-time candidate John Lee Evans: I am sure he's a good person. But, incredibly, he had to be talked into a school board race rather than run for Congress. What hubris/naivete/ego is that?"

10. Edgar wrote on May 8, 2008 6:18 PM:
"zollner: are you incapable of understanding when someone is writing with exaggerated sarcasm? I didn't say that was MY opinion. I said "FONZie say." But, thanks anyway, for validating my argument about the value (or lack thereof) of public education in the Peep's Republic of California. Might I suggest reading "A Modest Proposal" by Johnathan Swift, after which you will be fired up to go out and save the younguns of Ireland?"

11. Kelly Donivan wrote on May 8, 2008 7:38 PM:
"No more bond issues and no parcel taxes! Perhaps Mrs. Zimmerman is willing to pay, but I am not. I resent even the suggestion! I voted NO! on the last two bond issues in east county. These districts waste money as it is...why should we give them more? I have a kid in public school. And I have to constantly stay on his teachers to make sure that he is taught what he needs to know, that they do their job and don't waste his time or tax money. Do they like it? No, but there needs to be some kind of parental supervision of the schools and what they do. This school gives me (and my kid) superior service because they know if they fail, I will take their failure to the next level. Not an idle threat."

12. FO'NZ wrote on May 9, 2008 1:49 PM:
"I think Edgar's reference to Jonathan Swift is apt: what we are doing now -- or failing to do now -- amounts to eating our young. We could do so much better: maybe that will happen when there is real change in Washington after this election. I prefer to remain hopeful. Ms. Donivan: I am sure you are hell on wheels for your kids' teachers, but better that than indifference. I'm not sure what you mean when you say,"...if they fail, I will take their failure to the next level...not an idle threat." Let's just say, that sounds more angry than collaborative. I think school districts need to prove why a bond measure is required and when they do, citizens support them. I think a parcel tax is a last-resort and highly effective way to keep schools in teachers and books whenever the Governor runs out of money."

13. Miguel wrote on May 10, 2008 12:16 AM:
"Fran Zimmerman extolls Mitz Lee's virtues and then goes on to say that the real problem is unstable funding for our schools. True. But why does Mitz vote against resolutions to protect basic funding our our public schools? Her Republican party loyalty has trumped concern for schools in the past couple of years."

14. FO'NZ wrote on May 12, 2008 9:35 PM:
"I believe Mitz Lee is highly qualified to grapple with the public school issues we face today and I support her re-election to the Board of Education. Any comments about improving public commitment to funding public schools commensurate with the blather and vicious criticism leveled against the system, the kids, their parents and teachers are strictly mine. "Resolutions" at this moment of crisis seem pretty hollow to me."

15. PP wrote on May 14, 2008 12:56 PM:
"At what point will persons wanting more money for education answer my previous questions in post #8?"

16. Fed Up wrote on May 14, 2008 7:43 PM:
"Okay, PP. 1) UnfortunateIy, I cannot tell you about LA because I live in San Diego. 2) We are committed to public education in San Diego: whoever shows up, gets to take classes. 3) Someone who lives in the state of California pays resident tuition at California institutions. Arizonans pay out-of-state tuition. We do not inquire about students' "legality"or " illegality" because that's a federal job. 4)We need English classes for the many people who come here from other countries -- also called English Language Learners. We do not inquire about students' legality or illegality. That's a federal job. 5) We don't educate our own kids adequately because we are too cheap and are always complaining about who's "legally" in the classroom. 6) We barely pay for public education here and we certainly don't "subsidize schools in third world countries.""

17. FO'NZ wrote on May 14, 2008 7:43 PM:
"Okay, PP. 1) UnfortunateIy, I cannot tell you about LA because I live in San Diego. 2) We are committed to public education in San Diego: whoever shows up, gets to take classes. 3) Someone who lives in the state of California pays resident tuition at California institutions. Arizonans pay out-of-state tuition. We do not inquire about students' "legality"or "illegality" because that's a federal job. 4)We need English classes for the many people who come here from other countries -- also called ELLs or English Language Learners. We do not inquire about students' legality or illegality. That's a federal job. 5) We don't educate our own kids adequately because we are too cheap and are always complaining about who's "legally" in the classroom. 6) We certainly don't "subsidize schools in third world countries" and we scarcely fund them here."

18. PP wrote on May 15, 2008 9:09 AM:
"Thanks Fonz, Couldn't we at least quantify the legal status of our current student population and send an invoice to the feds for reimbursement or is that someone else's job? Like it or not LA Unified is the biggest player in California. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with their flat out catering to union interests at the expense of California tax payers. It's always easier to solve problems with more money than changing the way current monies are spent. I think you will find that the hostages (California tax payers) will no longer be the path of least resistance in solving the problems brought on by a lack of fiduciary responsibility in our public education system. PS. Great way to gloss over the issue of an illegal immigrant paying less for higher education in California than a transfer student from Arizona. I guess people from Arizona should throw away their US. identifications."