School bond measures, which ask voters to raise their own taxes, can have an uphill climb in the voting booth. So special interests in the 10 school bond measures on the ballot in San Diego County Nov. 8 are opening their wallets generously.
So far, those who favor financing everything from a workforce training center in East County to a new high school in Bonsall have contributed more than $925,000 to make their case.
Only one measure has attracted opposition funding — Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District in East County, with some $85,000. And the opponents have out raised the proponents. Details on that battle are below.
Tom Shepard, a San Diego political consultant who is working with committees supporting school bond measures, said proponents spend money to educate voters to convince them of the need. And that requires a certain kind of messaging to voters without children, he said.
The message to voters might be about “pride in a community, in some cases the fact that schools provide facilities that are used by the larger community,” Shepard said. “When you’re asking someone to raise their taxes you need to be able to describe some kind of benefit.”
That means if you’re a voter in a school district asking for bond approvals this election, you’ll be seeing fliers in the mail and messages in your Facebook and Twitter timelines.
[box type=”shadow post-form”]
Oops! We could not locate your form.
[/box]Shepard said there are good reasons for districts to ask voters to approve bond measures now. Low interest rates mean it’s cheap to borrow money, and a California state bond on the ballot offers the potential for matching funds, stretching districts’ dollars.
“The conventional wisdom is that the higher the voter turnout, the better chance you have of passing a bond,” he said. “November presidential elections are typically the highest turnout elections … so this is an auspicious time to have a measure on the ballot.”
A look at sponsors
All the bond measures on the November ballot have supporting committees, which raise and spend the money to get the measure passed. (In this election only the Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District’s measure attracted an opposition committee).
The top donor countywide among the 10 school bond measures so far is the MiraCosta College Foundation, which has given $150,000 in support of the MiraCosta Community College District’s measure MM campaign. That measure asks for $455 million and covers the coastal communities from Oceanside to Del Mar.
Other top donors include construction companies and contractor trade groups, which may not be surprising given that much of the bond revenue will pay for new buildings. Business interests account for about 82 percent of the contributions in favor of the measures.
Biggest donors in the construction field include the San Diego County Building Trades Council Family Housing Corp., which runs the National City Park Apartments and gave more than $100,000 to support two measures; the Infrastructure PAC of the Associated General Contractors, a local advocacy group that gave $60,000 toward two measures; and Erickson-Hall Construction, based in Escondido, which split $52,500 among three measures.
Overall, individuals have contributed just over 4 percent of all itemized contributions to school bond committees — donations of $100 or more. Money from other political committees made up just under 13 percent of the itemized money.
Story continues after this graphic.
Here is how the money breaks down by bond measure:
Yes on AA
Fallbrook Union High School District’s Yes on AA committee has raised $25,000 so far this year. The district is asking voters for $45 million in bond money, in part to modernize Fallbrook High School. The Fallbrook Teachers Association PAC donated $5,000 in October. Two companies that work on school construction each donated $10,000.
Erickson-Hall Construction, a major donor to this and two other measures, boasts about its experience building schools. On its website it says, “To date, we have constructed more than $250 million of new construction and modernization work on active school campuses in Southern California.”
PJHM Architects, which has offices in Oceanside and has contributed $10,000 to the Fallbrook measure, also specializes in “planning, designing and modernizing” schools in the state, according to its website.
Yes on BB
Grossmont Union High School District’s Yes on BB committee has raised $296,253 so far, second most for a bond measure in the county. The district wants $128 million in part to refurbish classrooms and labs. It also includes money for a new high school in the Alpine/Blossom Valley area. Of that, $4,350 came from people identified as district employees, including the superintendent, the executive director of facilities management and the deputy superintendent of business services.
The top contributor, construction company Balfour Beatty, has given $30,000. The company has undertaken multiple school construction projects in San Diego County, including Southwestern College’s $45.1 million stadium renovation project.
Other contributors at the $25,000 level include construction companies C.W. Driver and Erickson-Hall, and architecture and engineering companies such as Harley Ellis Devereaux and Ruhnau Ruhnau Clarke and Associates.
Yes on DD
Bonsall Unified’s Yes on DD committee has raised just $17,500. The district is asking voters for $58 million in part to build a new Bonsall High School. All of the money has come from the construction firm Erickson-Hall.
Yes on EE
Cajon Valley Union School District’s Yes on EE committee hasn’t raised any new money this election cycle. However, it has $405 left over from its Yes on Measure C committee. That group supported the district’s failed 2014 bond measure. The district is asking for $20 million to be used for new technology such as laptops, tablets and projectors.
Yes on GG
Cardiff School District’s Yes on GG committee has only raised $650 so far. That money came primarily from two individuals, both identified themselves as “self-employed.” However, Mark Whitehouse, who gave $500, and Sienna Randall, who gave $100, are both members of the Cardiff school board.
The district is asking voters for $22 million, to be used at least in part to rebuild Cardiff Elementary School.
Yes on HH
National School District’s Yes on HH committee has raised $7,576. Almost all of that money came from the Committee for Measure N, which was created to support the district’s successful 2014 bond measure.
The district is asking for $30 million in part to repair old classrooms and replace portables with permanent rooms.
Yes on JJ
Solana Beach School District’s Yes on JJ committee has raised $34,519 so far this year. The district wants $105 million, to be used in part to make basic repairs and to replace portable classrooms with permanent ones. The bond also provides money for a new elementary school in the district.
Four groups have contributed $5,000 each to the committee: TELACU Construction Management, Eric Davy Architects, APC, PardeeHomes, and Citizens for a Business Friendly San Diego (Kilroy Realty, LP).
Yes on MM
MiraCosta’s Yes on MM committee has attracted the most money. The district is asking for $455 million in part to replace and upgrade classrooms, upgrade career training facilities and expand the Veterans’ Center.
The supporting committee has received $416,881 in contributions so far. The bulk of that money has come from individuals and associations directly tied to the college.
Besides MiraCosta College Foundation and its $150,000 donation, other college-tied groups who have contributed include the MiraCosta College Faculty Assembly with $11,000 and the MiraCosta College Academic Associate Faculty PAC at $6,354.
Twenty-five individuals who list MiraCosta College as their employer — including two college board members — donated a total of $5,845.
The building industry also has invested heavily in this bond measure. Top contributors to the committee include the construction company Kitchell Corp. with $33,500 and the architecture and planning firm Westberg+White Inc. with $20,000.
Yes on X / No on X
Grossmont-Cuyamaca’s Yes on X committee has received $56,875 so far, less than the opposition has collected. The community college district wants $348 million to be used in part to build a new Workforce Training Center.
The majority of the supporting money, $51,875, came from the San Diego County Building Trades Council Family Housing Corp. Other top donors include the San Diego Electrical Contractors PAC and the law firm Stradling, Yocca, Carlson & Rauth APC, both with contributions of $2,500.
Critics have cited several complaints, including a lack of detail about the proposal. However, most of the dispute seems to center on a proposal to require union labor for all bond projects. It was cited by the San Diego County Taxpayers Association, which opposed the measure. In its statement, the association said the district’s plan to negotiate with labor unions for the projects “goes against SDCTA commitment to fair and open competition.”
Grossmont-Cuyamaca’s No on X committee has raised $85,602 so far. The single largest contribution was $60,000 from the Infrastructure PAC of the Associated General Contractors. Other contractor associations have also contributed thousands of dollars.
Interpipe Contracting Inc. contributed $3,500. The owner, Mary Smith, wrote the official rebuttal to the yes on X argument in the bond measure. In it, she criticized the bond for requiring unionized workers.
Yes on Z
Southwestern College’s Yes on Z committee has received $70,000 from just three contributors this year. The district is asking voters for $400 million, it plans to use the money for repairs like removing asbestos and lead paint. The district also wants to expand services and job training for veterans.
Similar to Yes on X, the largest donation, $50,000, came from the San Diego County Building Trades Council Family Housing Corp.
The other donors are the SW Regional Council of Carpenters Issues Committee, a labor group that contributed $15,000, and the San Diego Electrical Contractors Political Action Committee that gave $5,000.
- Editorial Standards Page
- Ethics Policy
- Diversity Statement
- Diversity Staffing Report
- Corrections Policy
- Ownership Structure, Funding
- Founding Date
- Masthead
- Mission Statement with Coverage Priorities
- Fact-checking Standards
- Unnamed Sources Policy
Editorial Standards Page
- Our Mission
- Ethics Policy
- Diversity
- Ownership Structure, Funding and Grants
- Financial Documents
- Fact-checking and Verification Standards
- Unnamed Sources
- Corrections and Clarifications
- Actionable Feedback and Newsroom Contacts
- Masthead
- Byline Policy
- The Trust Project
- Privacy Policy
Our Mission
inewsource is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom dedicated to improving lives in the San Diego region and beyond through impactful, data-based investigative and accountability journalism.
Our Vision
Betrayals of the public trust are revealed and rectified, wrongdoing is deterred, and inequities are illuminated thanks to inewsource’s deep, dogged, fact-based reporting.
Our Values
Truth: Above all else, we value the importance of a free and credible press. Truth is the cornerstone of democracy and the core value for inewsource.
Transparency: We build trust with our readers by adhering to the highest standards and ethics, and to reporting with facts, precision and context.
Collaboration: Our newsroom prioritizes collaboration over competition. We regularly partner with media outlets on reporting projects and to share content.
Community: Our reporting serves the San Diego region, and we strive to build relationships with our audience by getting out into the community to listen and engage.
Ethics Policy
inewsource will conduct its business with the highest standards of decency, fairness and accuracy. These standards shall apply equally to inewsource employees, freelancers and all others engaged in gathering information on behalf of inewsource. All receive a copy of these ethical standards.
In the course of our reporting, we will consistently:
● Identify our organization and ourselves fully and avoid false representations of any kind to any source.
● Obtain consent from all parties before electronically recording any interview or conversation except in extraordinary cases authorized by the Managing Editor and Editor. If a source refuses to be taped, that must be honored; no recordings are to be made without consent.
● Respect the individual’s right to privacy. inewsource will never manipulate or barter private, personal, health, financial or other extraneous information in the course of preparing its reports.
● Any source we describe or write about in any significant manner must be contacted. The employee should document all efforts to contact the source, and if unsuccessful, should summarize these efforts at contact in the body of his/her writing.
In addition, inewsource follows the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. The latest version, revised in 2014, can be found here.
Editorial Independence Policy
We subscribe to standards of editorial independence adopted by the Institute for Nonprofit News (INN) as follows:
Our organization retains full authority over editorial content to protect the best journalistic and business interests of our organization. We will maintain a firewall between news coverage decisions and sources of all revenue. Acceptance of financial support does not constitute implied or actual endorsement of donors or their products, services or opinions.
We accept gifts, grants and sponsorships from individuals and organizations for the general support of our activities, but our news judgments are made independently and not on the basis of donor support. Our organization also may consider donations to support the coverage of particular topics, but our organization maintains editorial control of the coverage. We will cede no right of review or influence of editorial content, nor of unauthorized distribution of editorial content.
Our organization will make public all donors who give a total of $1,000 or more. We will accept anonymous donations for general support only if it is clear that sufficient safeguards have been put into place that the expenditure of that donation is made independently by our organization and in compliance with INN’s Membership Standards.
Diversity
Diverse Voices
Inclusiveness is at the heart of thinking and acting as journalists, and it supports the educational mandate of inewsource. Race, class, generation, gender, sexual orientation, ability, and geography all affect point of view. inewsource believes that reflecting societal differences in reporting leads to better, more nuanced stories and a better-informed community.
inewsource is committed to employment equity and diversity.
Diverse Staffing Report
Below is a breakdown of staffing data at inewsource. We determine the composition of our staff by asking them to self-identify. It is based on a newsroom of 11 and a total staff of 15 as of August 2020. Percentages are based on 15 total survey responses. The numbers include full-time and part-time staff, full-time fellows and full-time and part-time interns.
| All Staff Percentages are based on 15 total survey responses. The numbers include full-time and part-time staff, full-time fellows and full-time and part-time interns. | Newsroom Percentages are based on 15 completed survey responses to this question. | Business Percentages are based on 15 completed survey responses to this question. | |||
| Gender Identity | Gender Identity | Gender Identity | |||
| Women | 80% | Women | 82% | Women | 75% |
| Men | 20% | Men | 18% | Men | 25% |
| Sexual Orientation | Sexual Orientation | Sexual Orientation | |||
| Straight | 87% | Straight | 82% | Straight | 100% |
| LGBTQ-identifying | 7% | LGBTQ-identifying | 7% | ||
| Not specified | 7% | Not specified | 7% | ||
| Speak a language beyond English at home | 33% | Speak a language beyond English at home | 18% | Speak a language beyond English at home | 75% |
| Race/Ethnicity | Race/Ethnicity | Race/Ethnicity | |||
| White | 67% | White | 73% | White | 50% |
| Hispanic or Latinx | 20% | Two or more races | 18% | Hispanic or Latinx | 50% |
| Two or more races | 13% | Hispanic or Latinx | 9% | ||
| Age | Age | Age | |||
| 20-29 | 40% | 20-29 | 45% | 20-29 | 25% |
| 30-39 | 47% | 30-39 | 45% | 30-39 | 50% |
| 60 or older | 13% | 60 or older | 9% | 60 or older | 25% |
* The percentages in the charts have been rounded and may not add up to 100.
Ownership Structure, Funding and Grants
inewsource is a nonprofit organization, whose legal name is Investigative Newsource. It does business as inewsource. The business was incorporated on Aug. 4, 2009 in the state of California. Tax-exempt status as a 501c3 was granted by the IRS on Sept. 15, 2010. inewsource is funded primarily by individual contributions and foundation grants. We are guided by a board of directors.
Editorial independence: Journalists employed by inewsource take no editorial direction from donors whose contributions may support the organization. inewsource will not hesitate to report on its donors when events warrant. Our Editorial Independence Policy details the firewall between journalism and revenue.
To be transparent with the public, inewsource lists its donors on its website. In cases where a donor is the subject of an inewsource story, additional disclosure will be made.
Financial Documents
We do our due diligence to earn your trust in our reporting, as well as in our governance and financial sustainability. All of our financial documents are made available to view so that our supporters can trust we are sound stewards of your philanthropy. Review our IRS Form 990s, audited financial statements and annual reports:
Tax Returns
Financial Statements
Annual Reports
Fact-checking and Verification Standards
Transparency is one of our core values. Today, there is a need to build trust with our audience because new media and ways of communicating spread lies and slanted news faster than “real” news. At the same time, this era of new technologies makes it easier than ever for news organizations to be transparent. People don’t just have to believe us, they can investigate our investigations with our source materials.
Transparency is key to building credibility.
inewsource reporters have primary responsibility for reporting, writing, and fact-checking their stories. But before a story is published, the reporter reviews all facts and sources with an editor or another reporter. Facts must be traced to a primary source.
In addition, we “transparify” certain investigative stories. This process involves publishing a version of the web story with hyperlinks to all the story’s facts. This is proof that all facts have been documented with primary evidence. We do this to build trust with our readers and to be as transparent as we hope the public figures and institutions that we hold accountable will be.
Unnamed Sources
Not all sources are created equal. Some sources cannot speak authoritatively, provide proper analysis or speak specifically to every inquiry placed before them. To maintain the integrity of our reporting, inewsource reporters must select sources who can speak with validity to the topic at hand, and avoid presenting unqualified or underqualified sources as experts.
If an interviewed source has a conflict of interest, or whose qualifications may be tangential or limited, reporters will note that within the context of the story.
It is incumbent upon reporters to fully background their sources to uncover conflicts of interest or slant prior to using them in a story.
Unless discussed prior to an interview, all subjects talking to inewsource journalists are on the record. Specifically, the source is identified by name and title, and their exact or paraphrased words are attributed to them for publication. If journalists speak with sources who are not politicians, public figures or those not commonly interviewed by journalists, staff should explain clearly that information discussed will be on the record and for publication.
There are times, however, when information may be critical for a story but cannot be found or verified by other means. For example, a source may be able to confirm specific information about a series of events they may have witnessed, but have legitimate concerns about using their name or title. The repercussions to the source could be legal, job-related retribution or personal safety. The source and journalist must discuss these potential dangers and terms of use should be agreed upon by both parties.
If inewsource publishes information from an anonymous source, inewsource will explain to readers, in as much detail as possible, why we agreed to anonymity.
Corrections and Clarifications
inewsource strives for accuracy in everything we do, which is why we are committed to fact checking our content. But sometimes we make errors. When that happens, we correct them. We also clarify stories when something we’ve written is confusing or could be misinterpreted.
We endeavor to always be transparent about our commitment to correcting errors and clarifying misperceptions. When staffers see, hear or read about a possible issue with the accuracy of any inewsource content, they are expected to bring it to the attention of an editor and the web producer so it can be evaluated to determine how to proceed.
Including the web producer is key because inewsource is a multimedia news organization and shares its content with multiple partners on multiple platforms. The web producer must alert these partners about corrections and clarifications.
Corrections and clarifications should be included at the bottom of stories and dated.
Actionable Feedback and Newsroom Contacts
Our audiences know the region we cover and have a stake in maintaining and improving the quality of life in San Diego and Imperial counties. We know your knowledge and insights can help shape what we cover and how we cover it. We invite your comments and complaints on news stories, suggestions for issues to cover or sources to consult. We rely on you to tell us when we get it right and when we need to keep pushing.
Your comments, questions and suggestions can be sent to the team as a whole at contact@inewsource.org or you can contact a specific member of our staff.
Masthead
CEO, Editor and Founder: Lorie Hearn, loriehearn@inewsource.org
Lorie Hearn is the chief executive officer, editor and founder of inewsource. She founded inewsource in the summer of 2009, following a successful reporting and editing career in newspapers. She retired from The San Diego Union-Tribune, where she had been a reporter, Metro Editor and finally the senior editor for Metro and Watchdog Journalism. In addition to department oversight, Hearn personally managed a four-person watchdog team, composed of two data specialists and two investigative reporters. Hearn was a Nieman Foundation fellow at Harvard University in 1994-95. She focused on juvenile justice and drug control policy, a natural course to follow her years as a courts and legal affairs reporter at the San Diego Union and then the Union-Tribune.
Hearn became Metro Editor in 1999 and oversaw regional and city news coverage, which included the city of San Diego’s financial debacle and near bankruptcy. Reporters and editors on Metro during her tenure were part of the Pulitzer Prize-winning stories that exposed Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham and led to his imprisonment.
Hearn began her journalism career as a reporter for the Bucks County Courier Times, a small daily outside of Philadelphia, shortly after graduating from the University of Delaware. During the decades following, she moved through countless beats at five newspapers on both coasts.
High-profile coverage included the historic state Supreme Court election in 1986, when three sitting justices were ousted from the bench, and the 1992 execution of Robert Alton Harris. That gas chamber execution was the first time the death penalty was carried out in California in 25 years.
In her nine years as Metro Editor at the Union-Tribune, Hearn made watchdog reporting a priority. Her reporters produced award-winning investigations covering large and small local governments. The depth and breadth of their public service work was most evident in coverage of the wildfires of 2003 and then 2007, when more than half a million people were evacuated from their homes.
Managing Editor: Mark J. Rochester, markrochester@inewsource.org
Mark J. Rochester began as inewsource managing editor in April 2021, having served as editor in chief at Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative newsroom in Manhattan. He was previously senior news director for investigations at the Detroit Free Press. Both newsrooms, he notes, shared a commitment to diversity and inclusion, and their investigative journalism often received national recognition for exposing problems impacting communities of color.
His family looks forward to returning to California, having spent more than seven years in San Francisco where Rochester was a senior manager for the Associated Press. While with the news cooperative, he led computer-assisted reporting training efforts around the West, both inside and outside of AP, and conducted a widely used analysis of the $74 million in campaign contributions that went toward the California gay marriage ballot initiative in 2008. The AP analyzed who gave and why and then made the data available to member newspapers. The resulting series of stories based on the data was AP’s 2009 Pulitzer nomination for Local Reporting.
Rochester, who served as a Pulitzer Prize jurist in 2017, also has held senior leadership positions at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, The Denver Post, Newsday and The Indianapolis Star. Rochester is vice president of Investigative Reporters & Editors Inc., the 6,000+ member international organization dedicated to improving investigative journalism. He also serves on the national advisory board of the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University in Washington, D.C.
Byline Policy
Most of our articles carry a byline to identify the author. In some cases, inewsource will use a brand byline such as “Staff” or “inewsource” for internal or editorial information about the newsroom. In these instances, inewsource‘s Editor and Managing Editor are responsible for content that uses a brand byline.
The Trust Project
inewsource is proud to be a member of The Trust Project and support efforts to increase transparency in journalism by displaying the 8 Trust Indicators on our stories. We launched the Trust Indicators on Sep. 16, 2020.
Privacy Policy
inewsource has prepared this Privacy Policy to explain how we collect, use, protect, and share information when you use our inewsource.org website (the “Site“) or when you use any of our services (the “Services“).
By using the Site or Services you consent to this Privacy Policy.
Log Data
Like many site operators, we collect information that your browser sends whenever you visit our site (“Log Data”).
This Log Data may include information such as your computer’s Internet Protocol (“IP”) address, browser type, browser version, the pages of our site that you visit, the time and date of your visit, the time spent on those pages and other statistics.
Cookies
Cookies are files with small amount of data, which may include an anonymous unique identifier. Cookies are sent to your browser from a web site and stored on your computer or mobile device.
Like many sites, we use “cookies” to collect information. You can instruct your browser to refuse all cookies or to indicate when a cookie is being sent. However, if you do not accept cookies, you may not be able to use some portions of our site.
Certain pages on our site may set other third party cookies. For example, we may embed content, such as videos, from another site that sets a cookie. While we try to minimize these third party cookies, we can’t always control what cookies this third party content sets.
Additionally, we may use third party services — such as those that provide social media conveniences, measure traffic, send newsletters and facilitate donations — that may place cookies on your computer. We don’t have any way of knowing how such services handle the resulting data internally. inewsource makes no claim, nor takes liability for the insecure submission of information via these applications.
Here are the services whose cookies you can find on inewsource.org:
- Sharing buttons for Facebook and Twitter. These use the standard scripts provided by each company.
- Google Analytics, which we use to measure site traffic. Google Analytics gathers certain non-personally identifying information over time, such as your IP address, browser type, internet service provider, referring and exit pages, time stamp, and similar data. We also use Facebook Pixel to measure, optimize and build audiences for advertising campaigns served on Facebook. In particular it enables us to see how our users move between devices when accessing our website and Facebook, to ensure that our Facebook advertising is seen by our users most likely to be interested in such advertising by analyzing which content a user has viewed and interacted with on our website.
- Stripe, which allows us to accept donations through our website.
- Salesforce to manage newsletter subscriber, donor, and other identifiable user data.
- Mailchimp, to manage newsletter distributions. We collect your email address if you choose to subscribe to one of our email newsletters or email news alerts. Other optional information that you enter when subscribing – such as your first and last names or city are simply so that we can deliver more personalized email newsletters. We DO NOT sell, rent or market your information to any other parties. We retain your information only as long as necessary to provide your service. When we send emails, it collects some data about which users open the emails and which links are clicked. We use this information to optimize our email newsletters and, as aggregate information, to explain what percentage of our users open and interact with our newsletters.
Personal Data
We only collect personally identifiable information such as your name and email address when you sign up for a newsletter, donate to our organization, or otherwise submit it to us voluntarily. We do not share your personal data with any third parties other than some common service providers, whose products use your information to help us improve our site, deliver newsletters, or allow us to offer donation opportunities.
inewsource limits access to all user data for the purposes of newsletter, fundraising, and customer service only. User data is not sold to or otherwise shared with anyone not working with or for the inewsource.
You may unsubscribe or opt-out of our email and mail communications at any time by hitting the “unsubscribe” button in any email you receive from inewsource, or by emailing us at contact@inewsource.org or calling us at 619-594-5100.
Donor Information
The identities of all donors will be listed on our website. inewsource does not share, trade, sell, or otherwise release donors’ personal information to any third parties.
Refunds
If you encounter errors when donating on the website, please contact us at members@inewsource.org. For example, if you submit a donation for an incorrect amount or make a duplicate transaction please email us immediately so we can reverse the charges.
Cancellation of Recurring Donations
You can cancel your monthly recurring donations free of charge by notifying us at members@inewsource.org.
Links to Other Websites
Our site may contain links to documents, resources or other websites that we think may be of interest to you. We have no control over these other sites or their content. You should be aware when you leave our site for another, and remember that other sites are governed by their own user agreements and privacy policies, which should be available to you to read.
Disclaimers and Limitation of Liability
Although we take reasonable steps to prevent the introduction of viruses, worms, “Trojan Horses” or other destructive materials to our site, we do not guarantee or warrant that our site or materials that may be downloaded from our site are free from such destructive features. We are not liable for any damages or harm attributable to such features. We are not liable for any claim, loss or injust based on errors, omissions, interruptions or other inaccuracies on our site, nor for any claim, loss or injust that results from your use of this site or your breach of any provision of this User Agreement.
Contact Us
If there are any questions regarding this privacy policy, please contact us at contact@inewsource.org or call us at 619-594-5100.
Ethics Policy
This policy can be found on this page.
Diversity Statement
This policy can be found on this page.
Diversity Staffing Report
This policy can be found on this page.
Corrections Policy
This policy can be found on this page.
Ownership Structure, Funding
This policy can be found on this page.
Founding Date
2009-11-01
Masthead
This policy can be found on this page.
Mission Statement with Coverage Priorities
This policy can be found on this page.
Fact-checking Standards
This policy can be found on this page.
Unnamed Sources Policy
This policy can be found on this page.
Article Post Types
post
Good job raising awareness of the pay to play nature of school bond property tax increases. Most people don’t know school districts DO NOT have to award bond funded contracts based on price. This loophole helps explain why those who profit from bond funded contracts are so willing to contribute. Check out the countless investigations and commentaries linked on http://WWW.SCHOOLBONDSCAM.ORG which show the extremely high correlation between campaign contributions and contract awards. Easy to see how this arrangement leads to waste and misspending of bond proceeds.
Let us stop calling schools “public,” and recognize what they indeed are: capitalist schools (fully segregated by class and race) schools of the empire.