With fewer than 11 months to go before the November general election, Menlo Park City School District officials are undecided on whether they'll place a ballot measure to renew or replace a parcel tax that district staff says is only a "temporary solution" to the district's financial woes.

There are several factors that make this particular election a challenging one for passing a ballot measure, Superintendent Erik Burmeister said during a Jan. 9 school board meeting at which staff and board members discussed the future of the existing tax, which expires in 2024.

Burmeister warned board members that the Nov. 3 ballot will be crowded with tax-related propositions, and it would be a "completely different election" than any the district has faced before. He and board members are unsure how a measure on the November ballot to amend Proposition 13, which governs property taxes in California, could affect the district's funding, making it difficult to accurately assess the need for a parcel tax.

The "split-roll" initiative would amend Proposition 13 to increase taxes on commercial and business properties, but not on homeowners. About 40% of the $12 billion it would generate would go to public schools, according to EdSource.org.

"We will have more insight into student enrollment (at a future date) and getting a little bit more of that information would allow us to make better decisions, which is in the community's best interest anyway," said Trustee Scott Saywell. "I'd rather do it right."

The parcel tax in question, Measure X, which passed in 2017 with an initial rate of $360 per parcel, will expire in 2024.

The deadline to have ballot measures placed on the November ballot is Aug. 7, Jim Irizarry, San Mateo County's assistant chief elections officer and assessor-county clerk recorder, said in an email.

Burmeister noted that November 2022 is probably the latest the district would be able to put a parcel tax measure on the ballot without some "significant budget cuts."

The board last year had preliminary discussions about putting a measure before voters to renew or replace Measure X at a higher taxation rate to help address deficit spending that could be a result of last year's teacher salary hike.

According to a staff presentation prepared for an October meeting, with implementation of a 5% raise for district teachers during the 2019-20 school year, the district's required reserve funds will drop below the minimum amount stated in board policy -- at least 15% of total annual spending -- within two years unless voters approve a parcel tax to replace Measure X -- one that would generate higher level of revenue.

"We need to have a more permanent solution than Measure X, so we have to do it right," Burmeister said. "A lot of schools are going out for parcel taxes, we are not going to be alone in school districts trying to get people's attention."

The school board is also in the process of hiring a political consultant to advise the district on a possible Measure X replacement. Board members noted that their decision on whether to put a measure on the November ballot could be influenced by what the consultant recommends.

Burmeister said that the cost of an election other than a November general election would be more expensive, since the cost of holding an election would be spread across fewer parties. Additionally, the cost of educating voters in preparation for a ballot measure during a "really noisy campaign" would be much higher, he said.

But board member Mark Box said that if the school board feels ready to go out for a November ballot measure, it should, but not before having many conversations with the community about the need for the tax.

Although the meeting agenda included discussion of a possible district bond measure, there was no such discussion.

Compensation

At the same meeting, the board unanimously approved a new contract for Burmeister, which includes a 5% raise during the 2019-20 school year, retroactive to July 1, bringing his salary up to $258,151.

It also voted to extend his contract by three years to June 30, 2023, with an automatice 2% pay hike and a "retention bonus" at the end of each of the three years.

The bonuses would be 5% of his annual salary at the end of the 2020-21 school year; 7.5% at the end of the 2021-22 school year; and 10% at the end of the 2022-23 school year, according to the staff report.

The board also began to discuss establishing principles of compensation to help attract and retain district employees other than teachers and some other certificated staff. Burmeister noted that a draft document of the principles is similar to the "teacher compensation philosophy," which was established in 2019 and emphasizes giving teachers pay increases that are higher than what neighboring districts offer.

Saywell said that he'd like the non-teacher compensation principles to reflect that these district employees hold as much value as teachers and aren't simply present to support teachers. He wants the principles to acknowledge that "there are a lot of different employees who make a really big impact on the culture and environment" of district schools.

In November 2018, Jarrod Coombes, president of the district's chapter of the California School Employees Association, told the board that support staff felt like an afterthought since the new policy includes only teachers.

The groups that will be affected in a non-teacher compensation policy include: classified employees represented by CSEA; unrepresented certificated employees, including psychologists, counselors, occupational therapists, and site and district administration; Early Learning Center teachers; and assistant teachers.

In the fall, the district's teachers represented by the Menlo Park Education Association received a 5% raise after the school board approved the teacher compensation principles. The raise is higher than they had been given in recent years. The board last approved raises for all district employees in June 2017, when it authorized a 2% pay hike for the 2017-18 school year and a 3% increase for 2018-19, according to the district website.

Enrollment

The board unanimously approved a contract, not to exceed $13,800, with San Mateo-based Enrollment Projection Consultants to study district enrollment projections. Of that amount, $11,800 will be for completion of a basic enrollment forecast update and optional study additions for the contract, effective Jan. 10 to June 30.

Although enrollment in the district has slowed in recent years, it may grow in the next two to three years with new housing projects along El Camino Real opening, according to the district website and district officials. This could impact capacity at Hillview Middle School, a former district administrator told The Almanac in the fall.

Video of the meeting can be viewed here.

-