Solar Panels, coming soon to a MDUSD school parking lot near you!

June 29, 2011 10:00 am · 151 comments

*This story was originally posted on June 16th, but we are reposting it due to the fact that we are getting a ton of email/facebook messages asking about the construction in the MDUSD school parking lots.

If you’ve noticed fencing around the parking lot of Clayton Valley High School (pictured above) and other local schools, it’s because those sites will soon be getting covered solar panel parking, and construction is about to begin.

According to the MDUSD, the district’s solar program involves the installation of ground-mounted shade and/or parking structures at 51 district sites. The 51 systems will be installed in three installation increments of approximately seventeen schools/sites per increment. The solar installation is scheduled for completion in April 2012. With a total of 11.2 Megawatts it is presently the largest K-12 public education solar program under contract in the United States. Once fully installed and operating it will reduce the district’s annual PG&E bill by 91% by generating 81% of the District’s energy usage.

To read more about the MDUSD’s solar project, please click HERE.

{ 151 comments }

1 b state June 16, 2011 at 8:09 AM

so, we are shutting down schools, cutting teachers, etc, but at least we will be green!
I applaud the efforts, and in the long run will save costs, but is this really the best use of money?
who is paying for this?

2 BagsflyFree June 16, 2011 at 8:16 AM

Now thats what i’m a talkin about.. Concord city council/BART please take note.. Pay for the energy now to avoid inflationary movement and monopoly utility rate increases.. Good job voters & MDUSD!

3 Anon June 16, 2011 at 8:18 AM

Wouldn’t it make sense to put cvhs at the end of the list so when they become a charter school they could pay for themselves?

4 Anon June 16, 2011 at 8:19 AM

Shouldn’t the solar panel project wait on CVHS until Charter is decided? Why would the district pay for that if they don’t need to?

5 theevaluator June 16, 2011 at 8:28 AM

Well I hope this whole solar panel thing gets off to a better start than what happened up at Delta View Elementary. District maintenance cut down the wrong trees because they couldn’t read the plans. Classic!!!

6 huey9k June 16, 2011 at 8:32 AM

Ah…. so THIS is why there were Cuts in teaching personnel… to pay for the construction. Pathetic.

7 Wayne Landana June 16, 2011 at 8:34 AM

Great… I was wondering about those fences.

Wonder if the school calculated their ROI on installing solar? I know when I looked at it a few years ago, it was going to take me 10-14 years to pay for the panels. With changing technology (eventually more efficient panels) as well as the fact that I’m probably not going to be in this house that long – it really wasn’t worth it for me.

8 Scoots June 16, 2011 at 8:44 AM

What about a windmill powered electric rail system to replace those old fuel guzzling school buses? Lets vote for that too. We really can’t afford not to buy it.

9 anonamom June 16, 2011 at 8:45 AM

Before the new solar carports are installed some other thing have to go:

“The district expects to cut down 60 trees at 51 schools to make way for Sun Power solar panels”. Step right up folks– the side show is at:

http://www.ibabuzz.com/onassignment/2011/06/14/mt-diablo-district-landscapers-cut-down-wrong-trees/#comment-5473

Well, 60 trees is really just what they’ve said, but if it turns out to be 5 or 10 at even just half of the schools, I make it more like one or two hundred trees or more, but then I didn’t learn my math in this District Then, whatever the correct number may be—- you have to make allowances for gross error!

They cut down the “WRONG” 6 trees at Delta View Elementary the other day….

Trees, Mother Natures natural sun shade, air filter, air purifier, oxygen producer, rain maker. Goodbye living planet. Hello property TAX bill!

10 Anon777 June 16, 2011 at 8:50 AM

While this could be a great investment in the future and it’s great to be GREEN, I’m not sure this is the best use of MDUSD funds at this time.

11 Anonymous June 16, 2011 at 9:00 AM

Title should read: “Solar Panels, stolen soon from a MDUSD school parking lot near you!”

12 ARE YOU LISTENING MARCEL??? June 16, 2011 at 9:02 AM

YOU are paying for this on your property tax, or second hand through your rent! The bond will be paid off in FORTY YEARS, but the solar has a lifespan warranty of just TWENTY YEARS. UmHmmmm.

13 @ Wayne June 16, 2011 at 9:15 AM

The District doesn’t believe they need to run an ROI on the solar investment because according to former School Board Member Paul Strange the project is a great deal for the District because their is no debt service.
Clearly the taxpayer’s money isn’t to be considered when determining the viability of a project that will be obsolete and an eyesore long before WE are finished paying for it in 2052.
More MDUSD math.

14 kdub June 16, 2011 at 9:22 AM

Wayne – My understanding is that the vendor the school district picked gave ROI projections and are actually guaranteeing them. If the district falls short of projected savings the vendor ponies up the difference.

15 anon June 16, 2011 at 9:24 AM

Eagle Peak Charter is also on the list for solar. I’m not sure, but I think the money for the project has to be used for the charter schools as well, so it doesn’t matter what happens with the charter status for CV.

16 S. June 16, 2011 at 9:28 AM

Unbelievable how many people don’t know where this money is coming from. So many people read the blogs and go online to complain, but clearly are not constructively participating in the process. YOU ALL VOTED FOR IT IN THE LAST ELECTION!!! This was a huge issue in the local news, and on this very site. Please help yourselves, our kids, and the community by paying attention to local issues and voting on issues that matter to us all.

17 anonamom June 16, 2011 at 9:31 AM

Ah, yes. 2052— Forty years from now—Half of these schools (and their carports will probably have been torn down; the houses being taxed to pay for the panels (that have been torn down) are roughly 100 years old. Scratch that, most of them have also been torn down, and their land will be high rise rat’s mazes, built around new schools that are referred to as Public School 32 or something like that, But nothing to worry about, in 2053 these solar carports will finally be paid for—Thanks to your Great Grandchildren!

18 Hi Speed Rail! June 16, 2011 at 9:48 AM

You dumbasses voted for this but all of us are going to pay for it. Start reading those ballots before you sign me up for this and hi-speed rail nonsense.

19 can we get a list June 16, 2011 at 9:54 AM

Just wanted to know if there was any way a list could be posted of the schools tht would be taking on the project?

20 Shuley June 16, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Too Much Negativity

Folks, unfortunately a lot of mis-directed and uninformed responses here. They did not lay off teachers, etc to do this. It was paid with Measure C bond money that was specifically earmarked for building improvements, etc. This money cannot be used for general funds purposes like paying teachers. However, the district expects to save millions every year in PGE bills, that will free up money in the budget for payroll etc. We did try to pass a TAX measure (which I would have preferred) the previous year which could have been used for any purposes but it failed to get the 2/3 vote needed. These bond funds are for many other purposes besides the solar panels, like repairing deteriorated buildings, installing computer labs, etc. (Too bad they cannot put drinking water taps in the school lunch lines)

The designs have already been written up for each school, they do know how many trees are to be cut down for the project. They did do an ROI and it does make sense to do this (except in the case where they could still be school closures at sites with these systems, in which case I was not convinced they have a plan for that)

The company providing these guarantees them for 20 years (maintenance, etc and will pony up $$ if they do not produce the amount of energy they guarantee) but that does not mean they will not last longer than that. Now we know why Eberhardt took his solar classes. Personally, I support this project. While I agree that the district has been poor with many spending decisions, this one makes sense to me.

21 Lucky Mom June 16, 2011 at 10:00 AM

I think this is a great investment for the district. And it will be a huge money saver in the long run.

22 David Molstad June 16, 2011 at 10:11 AM

Ya gotta remember this is Gary’s showcase project. The district spent something like $45,000 to send him to school to learn all about Solar Panels and how it all works, installation and maintenance. So its a sure bet that there will be no problems and every school will be fitted out with no cost overruns, no mistakes of any kind and everything will be perfect. We can be confident, Gary is on the Job.

23 Really? June 16, 2011 at 10:12 AM

Son to be stolen/vandalized and sold at the Drive Inn Swap Meet….hope funding also pays for security cameras….

24 Anderson June 16, 2011 at 10:30 AM

Don’t forget that when it comes time to replace aging panels, there won’t be much needed expense besides just replacing the panels. There may be other maintenance to do on the supporting structure over time, but none of that will be as expensive as the initial installation with all the construction and installation costs.

As #2 pointed out, this is a good hedge against inflationary energy pricing in the future, which *will* happen.

25 @kdub and @Shuey June 16, 2011 at 10:45 AM

@kdub –
The solar companies did not provide an ROI. The numbers they are guaranteeing are energy production numbers.

@Shuey -
SIt down with the numbers some day and look at what you call a return on investment. Look at the June 2010 presentation to the Board and the number of math error starting with the rebates and moving on to the cost escalations. The District used the cost of solar in pennies as their escaltor rather than the delta change in costs. They have since covered up their mistake by adding a 2% growth factor in a District with declining enrollment and 2 charter schools coming on board. The rebates were calulated at 18mw rather than 12mw.

NEVER do they address the cost of the money. Oh, Mr. Eberhart will get on this blog and say that HIS consultant Mr. Isom’s original numbers were wrong and that the cost is not 5 times the capital but 1.5… well that is nice but that is only for 1/3 of the bonds and are we to believe Mr. Isom this time or last time?

Please don’t join the ranks of the politicians who jumped on board and supported this project with a simple cursory glance and blind faith in MDUSD.

The fact is this project will be obsolete and an eyesore long before we finish paying. If our district leadership had worked half as hard on Measure D as they have worked on solar we might have a parcel tax. I hope you are not supporting a multi-city sales taxes because it is a STUPID idea and a distraction away from what MDUSD really needs – a PARCL TAX.

26 BagsFlyFree June 16, 2011 at 10:57 AM

@ Really? I really hope that the installers will make large stamping or engraving for all panels used on this project in addition to using ample led lighting and other security measures. It will be an embarrasement to allow a greasy tweaker with wire snips to ruin such a great effort.

@ David Molstad – While the 45k spent for “training” was a large sum, this project at the end of the day empowers the district (cleaner power and guaranteed ROI), while at the same time reduces their need to pay PG&E’s ever increasing rates. When panels do need to be replaced, they will most likely be replaced with more efficient and cheaper panels, making this effort even more future proof.

27 Concordanon June 16, 2011 at 11:04 AM

#15, I think you are correct. By law, charter schools must get their fair share of any bond or parcel tax money. I believe the amount of money they get is based on the number of students they have versus the number in the entire district. For example, if the charter school has 1600 students and the entire district has 32,000, then the charter is entitled to 1600/32000th of the money. At least that’s the way it used to be. My guess is that Eagle Peak was free to use their share of the money any way they wanted to (and that met the legal requirements for bond money usage). Maybe the district offered to include them in the solar project and they decided that was good use of their share of the money. Perhaps someone from Eagle Peak can verify if that is true.

As I remember it the Eagle Peak founding parents and MDUSD were on very good terms with each other when Eagle Peak was founded. The district administrators were impressed with the preparation and professionalism displayed by the founders and were very supportive of the school’s founding . Based on the reporting by the Contra Costa Times, that does not appear to be the case with the CV Charter founding teachers and MDUSD, at least from the teachers’ perspective. Too bad.

28 Mac June 16, 2011 at 11:04 AM

This happens over and over again.
Measure C money that can not be used for things that are really needed.
So they continue to pay for things that are less important then the Teachers & Students. (and Custodians)

Watching these things happen, as the school sites continue to lay off personal is really sad.

29 Concordanon June 16, 2011 at 11:07 AM

Ignore David Mostad’s lies. MDUSD did not pay $45K for Eberhart to learn about solar energy.

30 CVHS Friend June 16, 2011 at 11:11 AM

@3 and 4, even when CVHS becomes a charter school, the district will still own the property and regardless of whether it is a charter or not, it makes sense to lower electricity costs.

31 Anon June 16, 2011 at 11:25 AM

Oh no! They cut down trees???? We all know that trees can never be replanted! Trees are not a renewable resource, ya know.

Anyways, I think solar panels are the greatest. And I am most certainly not a tree hugger. Did you all see the part where it said the panels will reduce the PG&E bill by 91%!!!!!! That’s more money to pay for teachers and books folks. And another small benefit- covered parking! Seriously, that is great. Less faded paint hoopies with cracked dashboards running around.

32 David Molstad June 16, 2011 at 11:34 AM

@28Concordanon

I said “something like $45,000″ as I don’t recall the exact amount. Perhaps you remember the exact number, but certainly it was in that ball park.

I think its really great Gary has so many strong supporters.

33 Doctor J June 16, 2011 at 11:48 AM

@DM, I think that Gary’s training class was somewhere in the $1000 range. You may be confusing this with the Gang of Five raises which someplace in your range.

34 D June 16, 2011 at 12:14 PM

An excellent project, desperatly needed energy without pollution and building infrasructure. Its what we used to do in this country, invest in and build, properly fund our schools. The middle class thrived with this formula from the 50′s until Reagan convinced us unions are bad and changed the tax structure so the rich have all the money it will trickle down to the middle class. Well we can see how well thats worked out.

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/economic-ipecac

35 CuriousGeorge June 16, 2011 at 12:16 PM

I love this idea, thats why I voted for it, but I not sure why…they are installing upgrading with measure C money the schools that they are shutting down, Holbrook, Glenbrook and the unknown ones yet to come.

(p.s the map of Holbrook Elementary in the link is not Holbrook)

36 @Anon 31 June 16, 2011 at 12:18 PM

You must be reading one of those propoganda brochures. SunPower’s numbers show 60% of the District’s PROJECTED costs covered.

37 Anon June 16, 2011 at 1:04 PM

If they put solar on Glenbrook and Holbrook then they can’t claim energy savings as part of the school closures, that would be double dipping or is that MDUSD math?

38 Concordanon June 16, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Good question, CuriousGeorge. Is the district still planning on putting some special ed students into the Glenbrook building? To save money I think they were planning on taking some students out of the private schools they have been paying for and opening a school for them on the Glenbrook campus. The kids in question are those with the most severe emotional/behavioral issues. I think they also offered space at Glenbrook to the computer-based charter high school that will be opening, but the charter school turned down the offer.

I don’t know why they would install them at Holbrook. I don’t remember reading about using the buildings for anything else.

David Molstad, Dr. J. is “in the ballpark” with his $1000 estimate for how much the district paid for Eberhart to attend a UC Extension class on solar design and project management.

39 CDK June 16, 2011 at 1:54 PM

What a frigging waste of money, however you must consider the source!

40 Gary Eberhart June 16, 2011 at 2:18 PM

@Molstad,

Perhaps you feel that continuing to libel me is something that I am willing to tolerate indefinitely. You know very well the cost of the professional solar course that I took is no where near $45,000, yet you continue to libel me. The last time I brought this up you sent me an e-mail on January 23, 2011 asking me to forgive you. Do you remember that e-mail? Perhaps you’d like me to copy it into a blog comment to refresh your memory.

41 anonamom June 16, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Curious George; and the page link for YVHS actually takes you to YV Elementary—–and none of the layout maps show North, so it’s not surprising they cut down trees on the wrong side of the building. Mount’s map is upside down… But, we’re giving them three hundred and how many millions to spend?

42 anonamom June 16, 2011 at 2:35 PM

The Measure ‘C’ Oversight committee is meeting tonight at either 6:30 or 7:00 at Dent Center… They did not publish an Agenda, ((again)), and they published two different start times…but maybe the Strategic Planning meeting is having something else happening, but you can’t tell for sure, because they also don’t really publish what we could call an Agenda—-although both of these groups are subject to the Brown Act!

43 CLAYCORD.com June 16, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Even Dr. J is willing to admit it was nowhere near $45K. Wasn’t it like $900-something? And if I remember right, Gary paid the bill.

Mayor

44 @ Molstad June 16, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Don’t you run a business that promotes itself as “An advocate of Financial Literacy”?

Ironic, no?

45 anon June 16, 2011 at 3:14 PM

By my count (see 40 and 43) that constitutes DOUBLE confirmation that David Molstad remains a bald faced liar with some personal phobic like ax to grind with Eberhart.

Seek long term professional help there big Dave.

46 Molstad is an idiot June 16, 2011 at 3:17 PM

Doesn’t everyone just skip the comment when his name appears? I do

47 lake June 16, 2011 at 3:27 PM

PG&E after the Big One – will you have power?
Solar After the big one – If your house has solar will it be working after the big one?
Which one will provide you with power restored first – PG&E or your own Solar set up – Hummm…

48 @lake June 16, 2011 at 3:41 PM

With that thought process you would be a perfect fit on the MDUSD board. REALLY….. If the roof caves in…. if the shade structures fall over…
If there is no PG&E things are probably bad enough that there is no school.

How about we make $88million decisions based on sound fiscal principles.

49 Concordanon June 16, 2011 at 3:44 PM

Molstad is an idiot #46, I usually just skip on by his stuff, but when he posts an outright lie aimed at one person and he posts it time after time despite being corrected by others… well, I do find myself jumping into the swamp. It’s not fair to Eberhart to let it go unchallenged. There are some readers out there who might actually believe what Molstad says.

50 anonoman June 16, 2011 at 3:57 PM

I just hope the parts to these panels aren’t easily recycled, or at least the completed project is underwritten well for theft.

What happens when a teen (or parent who hasn’t had their coffee) slams into one of these ports? Will they look like awesome jungle-gyms to teens?

The long-run ROI for the project seems really good.

@ Molstad

The take-away from this is do not use your real name on the ‘cords.

51 David Molstad June 16, 2011 at 4:01 PM

I really don’t see what everyone is so upset about. The solar project is a big project. Gary has almost single handedly supervised this project from the very beginning and I am confident it will be completed on time and on budget with no surprises. As for the cost of the schooling, I admitted the number was a ball park figure. As I recall there certainly at lot of comments (mine included) when the information first became known.

As for Gary’s comment about liable, I see nothing in my previous post that is libelous. There are no acquisition of wrong doing, only confidence that the job will be done well.

There is no lie in my post and no personal attach or even veiled reference to wrong doing.

I have been an advocate of solar power for a longer time than it has been popular. And I am glad to see the district taking this step.

There are a number of things i would like to see changed in the district, many comment on this thread criticize the solar project and many other actions the Board is taking and I am certainly not alone with these concerns.

Let me state here publicly that I carry no vendetta for Gary.

If people want to believe my comment on this post was sarcastic, it is still a free country and people can comment as they like.

52 Anon June 16, 2011 at 5:18 PM

Rumor still here, Holbrook is the storage place for these panels, and their office’s of measure C.

We’ll see by June 30th

53 Anon June 16, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Is Molstad off his meds again?

54 Alpha Beta June 16, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Molstad is a moron. I think Gary should post the emails. What a jerk. “Let me state here publicly that I carry no vendetta for Gary.” That is a lie based on all your past postings.

55 Atticus Thraxx June 16, 2011 at 6:49 PM

I dunno know David Molstad, your post was absolutely dripping with sarcasm but libelous is a stretch, I agree. Gary don’t seem like the thin skinned type and frankly the district is lucky to have him way I figure it.You done went and pissed him off though and your denial and backtracking were weak.Next time take a minute and check before you throw around numbers. I like a little muckraking myself David, but stand on firm ground when ya do it.

56 Cuppa Coffee June 16, 2011 at 7:00 PM

Atticus, no telling how late you’ll be up writing tonight if Vicodin makes you as pain free and alert as it makes me. (Some people get goofy or sleepy on it, though.) Nurse Thraxx may have to conk you over the head with a frying pan to get you to go to sleep tonight! Glad you can start mending full time now.

57 Tess tickles June 16, 2011 at 8:15 PM

I work for the contractor awarded the project. Electrical contract alone would blow all your minds.

58 gman June 16, 2011 at 8:34 PM

@lake 47 the systems being installed on the schools will not feed electricity to the school in the event of a power failure. In order for that to happen you would have to have an automatic transfer switch which these projects do not have. This piece of equipment would cost tens of thousands of dollars per site. Remember the objective of the project is to reduce the PG&E bill, not to make sure the schools still have power in the event of a powerfailure. Therefore, when a powerfailure happens this system that is being installed will disconnect itself from the electrical distribution system of the school, that way it does not feed electricity back onto the PG&E grid and end up killing someone working on the PG&E wires.

59 Scoots June 16, 2011 at 10:28 PM

This is a perfect example of why people should be required to pass a basic IQ test before being allowed to vote.

60 Mike 18 June 17, 2011 at 12:56 AM

I have seen some pretty awesome solar installations. 81% is a big number but schools are primarily lights and HVAC. Plenty of HVAC inland here. And computers.

the new battery technology is very impressive seeing the neat stacks of batteries and total silence. I just read where the new Apple HQ will have CoGen and take Apple off the grid. They would use the grid for backup. They would use natural gas to fire generators to provide power.

I was on an oil platform offshore and they had a jet engine powered by natural gas powering everything. Noisy but cool.

61 anonoman June 17, 2011 at 7:19 AM

@Scoots

http://kpearson.project.tcnj.edu/interactive/imm_files/test.html

Remember, white people are scoring it…chances are, you’ll do well.

62 @Tess tickles June 17, 2011 at 8:45 AM

Please tell, what do you mean?

63 anonamom June 29, 2011 at 10:34 AM

OK, I’ll add new comments. The District says it will (quote) cut PG&E bills by 91 %.

I say they will be lucky to cut ELECTRICITY bills by 91%.

They are, as part of the same Measure “C” program installing GAS POWERED HVAC. Tell me how Solar will help lower the heating cost???

64 David Molstad June 29, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Yes I was a little “off” on previous posts. Should have stood my ground.

A little bird told me that the same people who installed the Antioch School District Solar Panels approached the MDUSD and were rebuffed. I am told the Antioch system is better and less expensive doing about the same job, (admittedly hearsay)

I still believe that MDUSD and the School Board has not been fully transparent on all the dealings leading up to the beginning of the construction on the Solar Project. And it will be interesting to watch what happens after the project is competed.

The bottom line is that construction has begun. Whether it turns out to be good for MDUSD or not, is yet to be determined. I’ll leave it to those of you who follow MDUSD closer than I can to determine the appropriate levels of benefits for the district and accolades, if any, to the board.

65 Ralph Roades June 29, 2011 at 10:57 AM

Folks, I haven’t read all of the associated posts; but saying the solar panels will cut consumption by 81% is misleading. We need to know the cost of the investment, the associated rebates, the final cost and the cost of didtrict electrical power per year to calculate the real return on investment. I just considered a large 1 megawatt solar system at work. The return on investment was over ten (10) years and this was with a large rebate. The solar technology being installed by the district will be outdated long before the ten (10) year ROI is realized; so it is impossible that the solar installation will pay for it’s self; even when you add the future cost of power per kWh.

66 Shak Li Batahat June 29, 2011 at 11:25 AM

The overall economic benefit to the district is questionable. What gets me is that the bonds sold for the project are 40 year bonds and the solar panels will be useless after 20 years. I am not saying the School District should not have installed solar but perhaps a little less of a system allowing for more efficient technology to be introduced sooner without the burden of bonds that will have to be paid for long after the solar panels turn to dust. I just think the whole thing is shortsighted and the Board made some really bad discussions on this project.

67 Funny Man June 29, 2011 at 11:35 AM

Umm what about security?
I mean we are talking about an installation at CVHS after all.
One weekend a group of drunken athletes will think it’s all funny haha and stuff to toss a can of paint up there.
What about the other sites? Some of these are high schools after all … not all yo angels are angels.

68 Sweet Little Brown Kid June 29, 2011 at 11:37 AM

Does anyone know WHY the panels aren’t being mounted on the roofs of the buildings? I think the theft and vandalism concerns are absolutely valid.

69 Shak Li Batahat June 29, 2011 at 11:51 AM

#68

I read that one of the board members went to a special school for this sort of installation. I would suggest that the best people to question about the details would be the School Board Members themselves.

70 Mac June 29, 2011 at 12:05 PM

I just wonder if they will be able to fix and/or repair these as time goes by.
Because you know kids will be breaking them a lot.
There isn`t anything outside, that kids don`t mess with.
So unless they have a 24 hour guard posted, they will be damaged.

71 Doctor J June 29, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Has the District replaced the six mature trees at Delta View yet ? Its been over a month.

72 Rob June 29, 2011 at 1:08 PM

I sure hope that they build really high and strong fences around them or they will be destroyed in no time.

73 anonamom June 29, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Whoa—ANON I would contend that YOU are lying when you claim that the amount spent for that little solar class has IN ANY WAY benefited the District! It appears that it did, however get the Board Member who took the class a nice lucrative new job, with a company very closely related to another company that continues to get lucrative new contracts with the District!

Mr. Mayor—You and I disagree mightily about certain things and certain people, but to let ANON (who I believe you can identify if you choose to look) post the very personal attack that was just posted about Mr. Molstad is really not warranted!

We all occasionally snap and bite other posters and what they have said. Many of us get a real kick out of being anonymously nasty, because the rest of our lives leave no room for it. Goodness knows, Molstad drives a lot of us crazy, just as I’m sure I drive a lot of the rest crazy.

Who among your followers would stoop so low as to bring in a “regular’s” Totally Unrelated Personal Finances as an attack. (besides me, of course)

The only other place I have seen this particular type of bad blog etiquette was on Gary Eberhart’s MDUSD blogspot a couple of months ago, when a well known person in the area wrote in using only initials, and Eberhart wrote a response, and actually used the persons name! That says a whole lot about him and his character as far as I am concerned.

74 Shak Li Batahat June 29, 2011 at 1:28 PM

@ANON June 29, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Is that you Gary? You little rascle! LOL

75 anon June 29, 2011 at 1:34 PM

I hope the solar panels will work better then the worthless security cameras that were put up in all the schools. That was a waste of money!

76 anon June 29, 2011 at 2:17 PM

if anyone wants to actually see how massive these structures are just drive by and post a photo of Concord High, they have several of the “carport” structures up.. they will be hard to climb I think, so to destroy or steal , it looks like it will be quite a feat! So , before you all keep commenting, go drive by Concord High and see what they actually look like…

77 anon June 29, 2011 at 2:21 PM

It appears that only a few understand that this construction is a Measure C project, and that Measure C money CANNOT be used for teacher retention, salaries, benefits, etc. However, this Measure C project will mean less general fund money spent on utilities, resulting in savings that CAN be used on salaries, teacher retention, etc.

78 Barb Smith June 29, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Why aren’t panels being installed on the roofs?

When solar panels were installed in So. Calif on the rooftops of old school buildings the panels with the roofs were torn off during high winds.

But we were told that panels can be installed on the roofs of the newer buildings.

79 anonamom June 29, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Or to put it another way anon 79: Your grandchildren will still be paying 35 years from now for the utilities they didn’t use today!

80 anonymous June 29, 2011 at 2:54 PM

DVC put up solar panels over their parking lots across the street from College Park High School years ago. The solar panels have worked for DVC and they have huge parking lots with tons of solar panels.

People always talk about the negative, when people have used solar panels for years and have save money in the long run.

The Target store in Walnut Creek has tons of solar panels on their roof. The hotel near the Pleasant Hill Bart station has solar panels on their roof.

Solar panels reduce energy usage and save money on energy bills. Many places have had them for years. If solar panels caused people to lose money, these solar power businesses would have all gone out of business by now. These solar panels are reducing power bills and they are saving money in the long run.

81 From Helo fly over country June 29, 2011 at 3:18 PM

How soon before half the panels are stolen even before they are placed? As for the Measure C money, well give a elected person(s) someone else’s money and every project looks like a great project. Oh well at least we will have some damn funny Claycord Blog entries to look forward too, when this is all said and done.

PS Mr Mayor keep up the good work.

82 Reality says... June 29, 2011 at 3:29 PM

“…and SunPower will maintain the solar systems for the entire twenty (20) years term”

Looked at the link but I have some unaswered questions that were not able to be anwered at the time this was voted on or now. Can someone provide a link to answer the following questions…

1) When this goes from project to core funding who covers the cost to maintain the system? I see SPC will “maintain” the system but does that cover the cost to replace these panels and the system/parts when they reach EOL? This technology, as I’m sure Gary learned in his training, is still evolving and much like server and cooling technology, what you buy today is outdated in 3-5 years which is why most hardware leases don’t extended beyond that. I would love to see the contract details of this agreement. Why would you ever enter into a 20 year contract with someone.

2) What will be done to cover theft and damage to these systems? Some punk burned down a shed at CVHS that was being used to keep the garden equipment and turf machine. 1 year later we have a fence surrounding the burned down foundation and no new turf machine. When the panels get damaged or stolen are we going to replace them or wait 2 years and then lose the efficiency of the system.
A great example is the camera system that was installed at CVHS…broken and useless now.

3) Can’t tell from the link if this will be raised or surface mounted panels. If they are floor mounted what is being done to accomodate for the lost parking spaces? At CVHS there is limited parking to begin with.

Any links would be appreciated.

83 Tal June 29, 2011 at 3:36 PM

I drove past CHS the other day, and noticed the work with the framing for these solar panels..in a word, ugly.. Why couldn’t they put them in the back somewhere, out of sight? The schools around here would never win any architecture awards, but why make them look like some sort of industrial site? I guess it goes with the flow though around here, architecture is something that gets little address…blegghh.

84 Shak Li Batahat June 29, 2011 at 3:41 PM

Being home with a flu big today, I have been able to read more about the solar installation.

From the link below, and please correct me if I am wrong; I am seeing that the PG&E savings MDUSD may realize are projected in a 30 year life cycle of the solar panel system while the contract appears to indicate that the life cycle of the system is only 20 years.

I am probably missing something as I do have a fever, so please correct me.

http://169.199.90.240/MDUSDFacilities/index.html

85 Anon June 29, 2011 at 3:53 PM

#71 sure sounds a lot like Gary

86 Linda L June 29, 2011 at 4:07 PM

Anon #79,
This idea that because it is Measure C money it can be wasted is getting tiresome. I know that is not what you meant and that you are trying to educate those who want the money to go to non-capital expenses but you feed directly into a mindset that is so prevalent in the leadership of this District.

While I understand perfectly the permitted uses of bond money I would contend that this Measure C has cost the District with respect to the General Fund. The “financial projections” (and I use that term loosely) for the MDUSD solar project are over-stated through math errors and bad/misleading assumptions. It is not even close to as good as they make the savings sound. The District was warned by many before the election that if they went forward with the bond that people would not understand when they started to see solar structures erected and at the same time their schools are closing, class size is growing, and teachers being laid off. They did it anyway. The general population feels cheated on so many levels – the lack of quality education, fiscal responsibility, and sound leadership. Because of Measure C this District has caused great damage to any chance they had to pass a parcel tax which would have gone directly to the general fund and into our children’s classrooms.

The cost of the project is growing. At the Measure C oversight meeting held before this past meeting in June, the budget had grown to $88mil. There has been another change order since that time with another soon to follow. I don’t believe that Pete Pederson’s $11mil non-administration salaries budget has been allocated to the solar costs, only to Measure C.

If I had my way, rather than spending $1.87 bil (or even 700mil) on a bond measure for solar (of which a vast majority of the money is interest payments) I would opt for doing the hard work necessary to obtain $37.5 mil ($99 parcel tax – no interest) where 100% of the money went to our kids.

Instead our District leadership is once again by-passing the hardwork necessary to pass a parcel tax and instead they are pursuing a multi-city sales tax that is incredibly problematic and it is questionable as to whether the measure would hold up in court since it is a direct bypass around the 2/3 rule. What a waste of time and energy on another hair-brained scheme.

87 anon June 29, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Wow, the negativity.
I’m happy for the solar pannels. Atleast there is somewhat of an upgrade going on that school. It’s very old and run down. Good grief people. Take a breath; go have a glass of wine or something and chill out.

88 Shak Li Batahat June 29, 2011 at 5:47 PM

This is intended to be humorous.

Here is a way to save some $$$ on the new solar panels….

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/green/detail?entry_id=92014

89 Chris June 29, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Glad to see this is being done, but with the singing flag coming to park next door, where is everyone going to be able to park? Traffic is a nightmare to begin with when the lot is open. Nice planning on someone’s part!

90 who gives a darn June 29, 2011 at 6:06 PM

This is worthless. Our district is stupid. Why would we use this money for “solar panels?”IDIOTS.

91 anon June 29, 2011 at 6:41 PM

I hope they will be finished before school starts on Aug. 30th. If not, parking will be a problem around all the schools.

92 David Molstad June 29, 2011 at 7:09 PM

I guess ANON #71 is not going to respond.

I had really hoped whoever the poster may be that they would contact me or post something, yet all there is, is a deadening silence of an evil person gloating over having harassed someone and no one knows who they are. Kind of reminds me of an evil old troll in a cave. Filthy, unhappy, alone, in the dark unable to act like a man, only able to snivel and drool and scheme with unquenchable hatred. Pathetic and sick little thing, hardly worth the maggots it eats. Cowardly and fearful of every shadow.

I asked The Mayor to delete both posts some time ago, since there is not response I can only guess that my request has been denied.

I have been contacted by an attorney who seems very anxious to start a law suite and identify ANON 71. I have not yet met with the lawyer, I am not a litigious person, but this guy is pretty anxious to start something.

As a last thought, I have seen a couple of posts suggesting ANON #71 is indeed our very own Gary. I don’t know nor do I have any way of knowing, but if perchance it is, is this the sort of person you want leading your school system? As I said just a thought.

93 Aesthetics June 29, 2011 at 7:21 PM

My question is what are these things going to look like? If it’s anything like the panel carport they put up at the county offices on oak park blvd then there is an issue. That structure is hideous! It looks like it belongs in sn industrial area near the refineries, not in a residential neighborhood! The oak park structure has taken away from the charm of the neighborhood and since all these schools are in neighborhoods the same will happen to those. Why is it so hard to make these monstrosities more aesthetically pleasing?????????????????

94 Anonymous June 29, 2011 at 7:25 PM

I agree that the negativity towards the solar panels is astounding.

It sounds like narrow minded people trying to attack what they don’t understand.

There are some people that are known as toxic personalities. I’m sure you all know these types of people. They constantly complain about everything and are filled with nothing but negative opinions. It poisons their minds and makes everyone not want to be around them.

It is time to cut yourself off from toxic personalities and show the toxic people that they are not wanted. Ignore these negative people like you ignore a whining child throwing a tantrum.

Just because you are bitter about everything doesn’t mean you get to ruin everybody else’s mood.

95 Mad Mom June 29, 2011 at 8:00 PM

Whew! Lots of anger and disinformation here.
It seems like fear of the unknown is driving a lot of the negativity. Solar panels aren’t the anti-Christ. They will pay off in the long run. Not only in the future PG&E savings but in giving much needed attention to the sad state of the antiquated heating systems at most school sites.. Think about the jobs being created right now. Tough economy but at least these people have jobs. We are working on building up our infrastructure. Have you seen the workings of our school sites? Talk about old school!
Try watching something other than FOX news people! Change can be a good thing!

96 Laughing My Butt Off June 29, 2011 at 8:08 PM

Law “suite?” Really? Hahahahahahahahahahah!

97 Shak Li Batahat June 29, 2011 at 8:28 PM

Just looking at some numbers from the site;
The District is participating in the California Solar Initiative (CSI) program and will receive approximately $16,150,815 in incentive rebates over the first five (5) years of operation. It is projected that the 11.2 Megawatt system will result in a savings of $192,531,705 over thirty (30) years. Additionally, as part of the District’s contract with SunPower Corporation, solar system performance is guaranteed at 95% for twenty (20) years and SunPower will maintain the solar systems for the entire twenty (20) years term.

$192,531,705.00 30 years
$182,905,119.75 95%
$6,096,837.33 each year
$121,936,746.50 20 years
$70,594,958.50 difference

The $16,150,815 is our tax dollars being given back to us.

There are no guarantees for the last 10 years and no service from Solar Power.

98 anonamom June 29, 2011 at 9:49 PM

Shak: You have to read it all. They will use the CA initiative money to make payments on this first bond sale for a few years, while they continue to overspend internally, and when that CA money is gone—they sell a second bond to use its money to pay what’s still owed on the first bond, and then they sell a third bond to make the payments on the second bond……. the cost of taking 40 years to pay back the $350 million non-amortized bond at interest only for the first 20 years? Roughly $1.2 BILLION. These schools are already 40-50 years old. How many do you think will even still be here in 40 more years?

We need to think about that while we rock the kiddies to sleep. Solar is great, modernizing things is great.

====== Killing the cow to get the milk is just plain stupid.======

MadMom: nice thoughts, and we’re all happy the kids maybe won’t have to wear their coats all day (someday), but they are putting in GAS Powered HVAC (in a year or two). Have you looked at the schedule? Solar won’t do much to help with the gas costs.

99 James June 29, 2011 at 9:54 PM

A huge savings is expected, how about paying back the measure c investment first?

100 I hope the Tweakers Don't Steal Them! June 29, 2011 at 10:33 PM

I certainly hope there is an alarm system in place (or GREAT insurance). It is only a matter of time before some low-life tries to steal them. It’s become anything that is not tied down (and some things that are). Sad.

101 Gary Eberhart June 29, 2011 at 11:09 PM

First off, when I comment, I use my name. Second, I rarely ever comment anymore because making an effort on blogs is a waste of time for me. The proof of that fact will be evident in the comments that follow.

The misinformation and assumptions that are being broadcast are so amazing; I’m not sure where to even start. I’ll just say that all of the negative comments that have been posted since The Mayor re-posted this today are baseless and false. I do think it’s important for our community to understand the facts related to the investment being made for the solar photovoltaic system that will produce power for the district for the next 30 years. If there are people who have questions, please feel free to e-mail me and I’ll do my best to get you accurate information. You can get me at gary@mdusd.net

That said, negative comments can continue in 3…2…1…

102 Nut Creek June 29, 2011 at 11:34 PM

@Anon Post # 71 Easy there boys… Now making your point is one thing
However, watch the bile. It may turn someone’s stomach :(

103 anon June 29, 2011 at 11:36 PM

@Scoots

Why would you want to exclude you and your family from voting?

104 anon June 29, 2011 at 11:41 PM

@anonamom

You’re obviously unfamiliar with bond funding. Or loans, mortgages, home improvement loans, and the like.

105 anon June 29, 2011 at 11:47 PM

@Linda L

If I’m not mistaken, there was a measure for a parcel tax. It was called Measure D, and I worked on the campaign. It didn’t get the 2/3 majority requirement; therefore, your point is moot. Bring in the second choice, Measure C, which did not need a 2/3 majority. I’d be perfectly happy with a parcel tax. Get one passed, and then we’ll talk.

106 anonamom June 30, 2011 at 12:06 AM

So educate me anon. I own this home, and three small vacation rentals on a nice little fishing hole in Kentucky. I have a fairly healthy retirement portfolio, although I’m really wishing I had stayed out of the REIT market, except for SNH–it’s been OK for me. But would love your input–go for it.

107 Concernicus June 30, 2011 at 1:27 AM

new rule: if you dont have the money for it, you cant have it.

108 LindaL June 30, 2011 at 8:21 AM

Anon #105
I too worked on Measure D. While we were running neighborhood phone banks 5 days per week for 5 weeks our District leadership was doing the following:
Young, Nicol, and Whitmarsh were attending UMDAF meetings asking for volunteers and money for that effort and calling it plan B. Those resources only go so far and when you are at the beginning of a parcel tax campaign you don’t dilute your efforts or demoralize your volunteers.
Eberhart, Strange, and Allen were non-existent. An occasional blog post or public appearance but that was it.
Linda Mayo worked hard in the Campaign headquarters.
As part of our local efforts to understand how to pass a parcel tax we (a few parents) interviewed school board members from San Ramon and Acalanes to find out what structure they put in place and to determine the role of key leaders in the District. You would be amazed at how hard they work and how much of a structure they have developed to be successful at their parcel tax efforts. We still don’t even have a list of all the parent contacts for communication at each school site. This would be one of the key elements to building the structure and MDUSD hasn’t even been motivated enough to make this happen, even after repeated pleas over the years. Our Measure D wasn’t a District-wide effort with leadership and vision. It was an attempt to throw it at the wall and see if it sticks. My previous point is not moot, our District is looking for the easy solution and has not done the hard work necessary to pass a parcel tax. With every new scheme they come up with it will set them back and restoring trust and confidence will at some point be almost hopeless. Negative… you bet!

109 MDUSD Board Watcher June 30, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Yeah, Gary tells a good story but the truth is something diffferent.

Its kind of like playing 3 card monte with him.

Two simple questions:

1. What is the expected life of these solar panels?
2. What is the payback period?

If the answer to question 2 is bigger than question 1 then we have a problem that even a solar class or two can’t solve.

110 Doctor J June 30, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Gary doesn’t care that homeowners will be paying for the solar panels long after they have quit working — all Gary cares about is that the electric bill paid from the General Fund will be less . . . . oh, and also he parlayed the solar project into a new job for himself, but I don’t see his company working on any school solar projects so I wonder how long that will last.

111 @mdsusd board watcher June 30, 2011 at 12:21 PM

Of course if the parcel tax had passed at $99 per parcel, there wouldn’t had been the need to be so creative to free up some much needed funds in the current fiscal year. People are morons sometimes.

112 anonamom June 30, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Yes Dr. J—and while he continues to say “every negative thing said is untrue”, he still hasn’t had any of the incorrect wording of “C” promises corrected. The District will NOT save “91% off of PG&E costs”, as was stated on the election materials to mislead the voters, and then the lie repeated a million times as if repeating it will make it true! It will save money on the ELECTRIC portion only. True, that will be significant, but they are installing GAS powered HVAC equipment.

When you read the SunPower contract it guarantees a 95% savings—-doesn’t say ELECTRIC only—-so the lie was carried over even into the contract. Are our District experts saying that GAS usage is only 5% of our utility expense? If so, they should say so, and I can back off. Until then—they are all liars.

Kind of like the lie on Eberhart’s business profile: “Chair of facilities and real estate subcommittee which oversees the expenditure of $348m worth of construction bonds”. So if he’s the Measure C “chair” what is Pedersen–our $10million dollar–oops–strike that –it’s now up to $15million dollar man called?

113 David Concord June 30, 2011 at 4:33 PM

anonamom June 30, 2011 at 1:55 PM

I would call the $15M man a puppet.

This solar thing is a done deal. Construction has started and unless someone discovers something blatantly illegal, its going to happen.

Now is the time to start looking at the future;
Monitor the construction.
Note change orders.
Challenge overrides.
Keep very close accounting of all of the money being spent.

We, as voters, all need to keep track of every aspect of this project. This is an incredible amount of money, our money, and we have every right to be involved every step of the way. And if that means weekly updates on the construction project, then we should have them.

We should not forget that this project is our, the residents, money, We have entrusted this project to the school board. But I think we need to keep a close watch on every aspect of this huge project.

114 Gary Eberhart July 1, 2011 at 12:17 AM

News flash. Solar photovoltaic systems generate electricity, not natural gas. I learn something new everyday…

Dr. J. What is the payback period for the bonds that are funding the solar project? Do you know? If you think the payback period exceeds the estimated lifespan of the system, you’d better do some homework.

That’s why the people who continually post the misinformation and lies are not willing to have a live, in person public debate on the issue. Doing so is not possible when the facts are not on your side.

Had we not moved forward with the solar project, we would have been laying off another $3 million per year in additional employees. That is fact and it is indisputable.

We are fortunate in this district to have the support of the majority of our community, a community that understood the value of the solar photovoltaic system and a community that was willing to support our efforts with hard earned tax dollars. Thank you.

115 Linda L July 1, 2011 at 4:56 PM

Mr Eberhart,
That is just not true. First off many who voted for Measure C now regret doing so, this includes some of those who endorsed the measure. It is hard not to vote for something that is “sold” as fixing our crumbling schools. In addition, no opposition could have competed with the slick mailers that were sent out during the last weeks of the campaign. So I would not be too sure of your majority support. In addition, I would love to have a public discussion with you regarding the solar project and the bonds. It is you who continually asks to speak to individuals in private. It is the Measure C oversight committee who does not allow questions from the audience. I would love to have a discussion right here, right now.

Let’s see if I get straight forward answers. Why was the last bond issuance only for $10mil? Why are you running the $10mil concurrently with the Measure C 2002 bonds rather than deferring the interest and extending the term as indicated during the election? It appears you have now filled in the gap up to the $60 max (clearly the Superintendent presents this as a target not a max) promised to the voters, are you having trouble selling the bonds within the confines of the future $60 limit due to the onerous terms? Why did you rescind the refunding of the Measure C 2002 bond when just weeks earlier you pontificated at a Board meeting how wonderful it would be for the taxpayers? Were you planning on pulling out additional funds? How many times have you done that already? How many times for Measure A? Why is there no Measure C 2002 oversight committee but there is still a balance of Measure C 2002 funds? Where are the audits after 2008? Why were your first energy escalations for the solar project based on 6.7%, then modified to what was touted as a conservative 5.5%? Then still as recently as this past spring, Pederson claimed at the Measure C oversight committee meeting that while the escalations have historically been 6.7%, MDUSD has decided to use 4.7%. Are you just trying to find a way to justify bad math? Why did a 2% growth factor magically appear (it wasn’t in the Oct 2010 presentation)? How do you justify a 2% growth factor when you have declining enrollment and two charter schools coming on board next year? It’s odd that the 2% growth factor and the 4.7% escalation get us back to your originally over-inflated 6.7%, how can you explain that?
Why are you using a 30 year “financial analysis” when the Sun Power guarantees are only for 20 years and obsolescence is sure to become a factor? If you use 30 years how can you completely disregard costs in those future years? Why do we continue to hear that the solar project costs $67 mil when it is closer to $90mil with another change order on the horizon?

I have plenty more question but we can start here. I sincerely would love to know the answers.

116 David Molstad July 1, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Hey Gary, you going to accuse Linda L with being libelous too? Just wondering….

117 anonamom July 1, 2011 at 6:34 PM

And Gary, while you play glib, nah, while you play smart ass (which is very becoming in a school board president!), please explain how and why so many items done (I’ll say allegedly”) through 2002 Measure C—and signed off as complete, have been added as items on the 2010 “to do” list. We’ll agree that painting probably does need to be redone every several years. Maybe even pavement overlays and things that get abused; but new roof systems in 2005 need leak repair in 2010? Completely new central-control irrigation systems in 2006 need replacing in 2010? Like Linda, I could go on, considering there are 51 facilities being padded to justify that emergency need for $358million dollars.

118 anonamom July 1, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Gary: We are “live”. Mr. Mayor would likely let us have a reasonable back and forth for as long as necessary to facilitate truth, and this is as public as it gets. Through your growing arrogance you seem to have forgotten your place.

Volunteer for the good cause? Yes, at one time. Was I a great supporter of you at one time? Yes. The last several years? Not so much! Through personal greed you have changed, you have lost sight of the “good cause”.

What you wanted, big man, was solar. You should have just asked us for solar. “Give me $90 million and I will save you all a few million dollars more than it will cost. We’ll pay it off in 15 years and and we’ll put that millions saved right straight into the classroom. Not in raises, not in bene’s for me and not in consultants telling us how to spend what’s left when they’re through taking their slice–but straight into the best teachers, the best systems.” See?

119 MDUSD Board Watcher July 1, 2011 at 7:45 PM

Gary and company always want to have a private conversation you know to avoid something going on record and appearing in a courtroom some day.

Gary I triple dog dare you to answer Lindas questions.

Your silence exposes you.

120 Fred P. July 1, 2011 at 8:17 PM

‘Scuse me, but…..

Teachers are paid out of the operating expenses.

The solar panels are a capital cost – paid out of Measure C.

That’s two different pockets – solar panels have NOTHING to do with teacher pay – except they’ll help reduce the operating expenses… but NOT to the tune of what Gary E. is talking about.

Do the math – the ENTIRE math problem. You’ll see the bill of goods we were sold.

121 David Molstad July 1, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Anonamom posted a very compelling comment addressing Gary;

“Through your growing arrogance you seem to have forgotten your place.”

I seriously doubt Gary will respond to these posts, but I am confident he reads them.

Gary, with the serious accusations and unanswered questions posted here and other comments publicly stated and the threats leveled by you, an elected representative, at voters, perhaps its time for you to resign from the board.

Nothing libelous here, only an opinion of a voter who has come to distrust an elected representative. It may be to your benefit to give this suggestion serious thought.

122 David Concord July 1, 2011 at 9:26 PM

@Fred P
The money may be in two different pockets, but its all tax money, all our money.

123 Mr. Anon E. Mouse July 1, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Oh my, to be disavowed by anonamom… very damning.
Measure C never smelled kosher to me. It will be interesting when all the “facts” come to light.

124 Gary Eberhart July 1, 2011 at 9:52 PM

Linda,

I am willing and available to meet and debate the issues that pertain to our solar program and our bonds. Let’s agree on a time and place and I will make myself available. I respect your willingness to discuss these important issues.

Gary

125 anonamom July 1, 2011 at 10:46 PM

Linda, ask for public mic time at an open board meeting! mano y mano.

When someone with a financial stake wants to sell some snake oil they get unlimited time and power point backup. When the public has something to question, they get one to three minutes before Gary yells “OK—NEXT”?

126 Shak Li Batahat July 2, 2011 at 4:39 PM

So when and where is this discussion between Linda and Gary and anonamom going to be held? I, and a few others, might like to sit in and listen.

127 LindaL July 3, 2011 at 8:52 AM

Gary,
I would like to suggest a round table discussion where the public can attend and ask questions with a back and forth dialogue. No time limits on the questions, no cut-off on follow-up questions. Just interested parties sitting around a table asking questions and getting answers. Obviously, you can set a limit on the overall time of the meeting. I am having trouble with my internet connection this weekend but will get back to you with a location and we can work out a time. I would like it to be a noticed meeting just in case other Board members would like to attend. Thanks.

128 FOONMAN July 3, 2011 at 9:42 AM

I havw to agree with #12. I investigated using solar panels and found that just about the time I would start saving money in the long term use, it would be time to replace about 20k worth solar panels. Not to mention opening the coal mines which fire most of our electric plants…….but thats another story

129 Shak Li Batahat July 3, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Great idea Linda. An open forum not so much to argue or accuse, but just to understand what is going on and what thought processes went into the plans. The board needs to be there along with the superintendent.

Linda, I would suggest you set up the format and run the show, The Board needs to be there to discuss the concerns, not to run the meeting,.

Looking forward to seeing a time and place set up.;

130 MDUSD Board Watcher July 3, 2011 at 4:39 PM

If Gary actually agrees to meet in public and answer questions, I’ll eat my hat.

Not a chance in hell that will happen.

131 Shak Li Batahat July 3, 2011 at 5:47 PM

@MDUSD Board Watcher July 3, 2011 at 4:39 PM

Let’s think positive!

And if he does not, then folks can decide what to do next.

An amusing thought just crossed my mind, had to do with tar and feathers. lol

132 @Mdusd board July 3, 2011 at 5:58 PM

The time for questions is over. The bonds have been sold and the project has started. Ther are always these type of people whose heads were up their asses and NOW the want to go back and be part of it. Get over it and move on and next time pay attention.

133 Shak Li Batahat July 3, 2011 at 6:32 PM

If people really think this is a bad deal, just don’t vote for the same board members again. There is an option of a recall, but its a tough process. The people who voted for the present board and who are now unhappy need to take action if any is going to be taken.

134 Doctor J July 3, 2011 at 6:52 PM

@132 Its not over until its over. Just ask the Pleasanton taxpayers. “PLEASANTON RESIDENTS learned last week that they will pay $9.3 million more in property taxes for bonds they never approved because past school officials lost their moral compasses in pursuit of more construction money.”
http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_18347300?IADID=Search-www.contracostatimes.com-www.contracostatimes.com
Its about time that Linda L’s questions got answered in writing and published. What happened to the transparency and accountability promised by Gary Eberhart, Sherry Whitmarsh, and Linda Mayo ?

135 Shak Li Batahat July 3, 2011 at 7:07 PM

If someone on the Board or the Board as a group has done something wrong they certainly should be held accountable.

I agree with Dr. J, Llinda L’s questions need to be answered. The MDUSD board needs to make itself available to the voters to address these concerns.

136 Gary Eberhart July 3, 2011 at 9:32 PM

As I have said. Set the time and place and those who participate can determine the format. I will insist that all who participate must identify themselves.

137 Atticus Thraxx July 3, 2011 at 9:52 PM

Your a mensh Herr Eberhart. Keep up the good work and remember you do enjoy the support of many in our community. Myself included.

138 anonamom July 3, 2011 at 11:35 PM

So you see Linda, he’ll never agree to making it a legally posted meeting.

THE BROWN ACT: Meeting Rule #1. Sign-in must not be required. Sign-in is permitted if it states that it is voluntary. Speaker must not be required to state their name.

Pesky rules! One can never be too careful.

139 Doctor J July 4, 2011 at 6:16 AM

Gary, Please permit me to ask you a slightly different question. With the implementation of furlough days this last school year, actual classroom instructional time decreased, and I recall that as a board in your new budget you projected — please correct me with the correct numbers if I get it wrong — additional classroom furlough days of 7 to 10 days per year for the next three years [even though not yet finalized with the MDEA] resutling in up to two weeks less instructional time. Will the solar savings to the general fund completely reduce the need for furlough days ? When will the instructional time from its base in 09/10 ever be increased ?

140 Concordanon July 4, 2011 at 9:13 AM

Mr. Eberhart, just let it go. Don’t get involved in a tit for tat discussion over the solar panels. The measure was approved by the voters. It’s underway. There will always be critics out there, no matter what you or the board do. Just do your best as a board member to see that the project is done correctly.

There are many of us who appreciate your many years of service to MDUSD. We appreciate that you and the other board members have had to make many difficult and unpopular decisions due to the sad state of the state budget. When the naysayers post here, just ignore them. If you feel you must respond, then just post the financial facts one time. Then stop. It’s not helpful to the district if you let yourself get sucked into a personal argument on a blog. Just let it go.

141 anonamom July 4, 2011 at 10:09 AM

@140 “…just post the financial facts one time…” That’s all we’ve ever asked for!

142 Doctor J July 4, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Concordian, so what about the TRUTH are you afraid of ? And if the statements are not the TRUTH, what do you suggest be done ?

143 The Thinker July 4, 2011 at 12:44 PM

I’ll attend Gary and Linda’s meeting if David Molstad will. I’d love to see him put his money where his (large) mouth is. Also I’ve never seen a moron in person. Is he still considering his law suite?

144 Doctor J July 4, 2011 at 1:08 PM

@Thinker — Another Garyite — all you can do is call other people names rather than discuss the facts. So what if someone makes a typo.

145 David Molstad July 4, 2011 at 1:38 PM

@The Thinker July 4, 2011 at 12:44 PM
LOL it is always so easy to call people names when in hiding. I don’t know when this meeting may take place or whether I will be able to attend, even though I would very much like to be there.

So, I will be at Panama Red tomorrow at 10AM. Why don’t you come on down and say hi. You can buy me an Ice Tea and we can have a chat about whatever you please. I only have 30 min available so don’t be late.

I look forward to seeing you then.

146 Gary Eberhart July 5, 2011 at 10:51 PM

Concordanon brings up very rational points. I am not interested in debating people who are not interested in getting accurate information out to our community. We as a District have done everything in our power to ensure that all available information relative to our solar project and our bonds has been given to our community. Thanks to the support shown to our students by our amazing community, we are under constriction on the Nation’s largest solar photovoltaic generation project for a K-12 school district, a project that will generate millions of dollars that will directly benefit our students. These facts are indisputable. We appreciate the overwhelming support of our students that our community has shown. There is nothing to be gained from debating with individuals who have no desire to look at obvious facts. Many people continue to misinform the community. The real information is abundantly available through our District web site, through individual Board Members, as well as through the Superintendent’s office. I continue to encourage the community to educate themselves on all issues that involve the Mt. Diablo Unified School District.

Gary Eberhart

147 anonamom July 6, 2011 at 8:21 AM

Gary: Quoting you, as was posted on your (now deleted) Blog a year ago—”The District has a subcommittee of the Board called the Facilities Subcommittee and some of the meetings were held during regularly scheduled Facilities Subcommittee meetings, which are public meetings. We do not have secret meetings. ”

I asked then for public records of those meetings, and I’m still waiting………….

Gary, I don’t need a debate, just some assistance. So, maybe you could just tell me where these “Public Meetings” agendas and/or minutes are posted on the District’s website. I’ve looked and looked.

148 Doctor J July 6, 2011 at 8:37 AM

Gary, would you please have the courtesty to answer the simple questions I posted in #139 ? I am not debating, just seeking accurate information which I am sure you know, but most of us don’t.

149 Linda L July 6, 2011 at 8:59 AM

Are you serious? Are you saying you will not meet with the public to sit down and answer questions? Are my questions above irrational? Are the answers to those questions on a website somewhere? I have been asking some of these questions for over 18 months, if that does not show a sincere interest in obtaining accurate information I don’t know what does.

If you reconsider I would like to meet at the Ygnacio Valley library. You can let me know the dates that work for you. If not, I guess that is two steps backwards for restoring trust and confidence.

150 Linda L July 6, 2011 at 9:33 AM

Gary,
I went back and reread you post. I would like to remind you that you said the following in comment #114:
“That’s why the people who continually post the misinformation and lies are not willing to have a live, in person public debate on the issue. Doing so is not possible when the facts are not on your side.”

151 Dan July 6, 2011 at 9:37 AM

Gary! Come on now.

You know I emailed you and the rest of the board and asked one simple question. Can anyone give me any information on why it is ok for Measure C funds to be used to pay current employee salaries?

I got a response from the esteemed district lawyer that said in effect: we have done lots of work in this area, but due to client attorney privelege it will not be disseminated.

So Gary how does that fit with your statement from above, “The real information is abundantly available through our District web site, through individual Board Members, as well as through the Superintendent’s office.”

Please help me out here.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: