I am heartened to hear how many people support the parcel tax and are willing to pay a little more to protect the quality of our schools and the quality of life in Alameda. I know a large majority of Alamedans will vote "Yes" in June. Unfortunately, due to California's barely functional political system, it will take more than a large majority: A two-thirds "supermajority" need to vote "Yes" to save our schools.

I have heard two kinds of arguments from the small group that opposes the tax. One acknowledges that the schools are underfunded and will be hurt by the coming budget cuts, but argues that the money should come from "somewhere else" besides a parcel tax. Such wishful thinking has been addressed many times.

Efforts to make state funding more rational, reliable and fair are under way but will take years to be successful. The Alameda Unified School District budget has already been cut to the bone. The district operates more efficiently and successfully than almost any other in the region. There is simply no other "somewhere" to get the money to save our schools next year.

The second argument against the parcel tax is more about feelings than facts. Some feelings are difficult to acknowledge because they sound a little selfish: "Why should I pay to support your kids' education?"

This might seem like a reasonable question. What do the average Alameda residents gain from this parcel tax if they don't

have kids in the schools? There are fact-based responses: to maintain property values, business revenues and overall quality of life in Alameda, it is necessary to adequately fund our schools.

People's feelings can inhibit their ability to rationally assess these facts. But do you want to live in a place where people are only concerned with their own self-interest or do you want to live in a real community where people reach out to each other across the divides of age and family status, ethnicity and religion, and all the things that might divide us, and support each other as neighbors and friends?

As an example, our next-door neighbor, a retired World War II vet, raised his children in the 1950s. Although we differed