The right way to propose a school parcel tax

5. The Woodside district parcel tax would be up for a vote during the November general election ballot, not a special election.

General elections have high turnout so that more in the community have a say and cost the school district tens of thousands of dollars less to pay for.

Pacifica School District's Measure D for a $118 parcel tax with a 10 year expiration passed with 73% Yes votes.

Jefferson Union High School District's Measure E for a $60 parcel tax with a 10 year expiration passed with 71% Yes votes.

Candidates running for the two open seats on the MPCSD Board should consider including a proposal to consolidate, reduce and provide a sunset for the existing parcel taxes. A five year term with a reduction from the current $851 down to $500 would be reasonable. They might also suggest a replacement to the "opt-out" senior exemption with an "opt-in" feature. E.G., the District could solicit authorization from property owners to collect $1,000/year in added tax. Currently, the district provides the San Mateo County Controller's Office with a list of Senior exemption parcel #'s. With "opt-in", a similar, but opposite list would be provided. Look at it as an alternative to filtering the $1,000 through the Foundation. No muss, no fuss, one tax bill. And, the District could even provide honorable mention on it's website.

Others in this forum might suggest that teachers who bring their children to MPCSD from another district should be encouraged to "opt-in".

There are those who continue to massage the numbers, in the context of the status quo, and say the district needs more money. The status quo is not an option. The voters said they have had enough. Class size is on the table. Teacher salaries should be off the table. Retirement alternatives to CalSTRS, whose UAL will be costing more than $2,000 per ADA in state and local bailout, should be considered. Measures to mitigate the escalating cost of overly generous healthcare benefits must be effected.

Forget the status quo.

Last night's discussion at the School Board meeting confirms that most of the Board are still in denial regarding the failure of Measures A and C.

Sadly most of the time was spent talking about the "misinformation" provided by the opponents rather than coming to grips with the fact that the Board stonewalled every attempt by concerned citizens to obtain factual information.

A ballot measure which consolidated all of the current parcel taxes and which had a fixed term could and should be placed on the November 2016 General Election ballot. If the many questions that have been asked of the District are answered I predict that such a measure would receive the required 2/3 approval.

You ever notice that when they claim the measures lost due to "misinformation" they never identify exactly what that "misinformation" was? It would be nice to know what it was. Makes one think that they don't identify exactly what was wrong with the information put out by those who wished to defeat the measures because they can't. It doesn't exist. Measure A and C opponents were RIGHT.

It's time for the board to step up and acknowledge they've screwed up. It's time for them to own there mistakes and then move forward to correct them. Step one would be to tell the teachers union they absolutely will not get a pay raise. They're already among the highest paid in the state. They're not going anywhere if they don't get raises. Where are they going to go? Someplace that pays less? Don't think so.

If there was "misinformation," it is very easy to correct on their part. Put out the "real numbers". Instead, all we got were a bunch of excuses why revenue shouldn't count as revenue while the district "corrected" their own per pupil spending then compared it to data from other districts pulled straight from ed-data unaltered. Continually attacking the opponents shows a lack of understanding of the real issues at hand.

Current revenue cannot support the overbloated spending habits of the district. That's the bottom line. If you cannot do this while we're in a boom economy, what's going to happen when the economy tanks? You cannot cry that you have a huge deficit then turn around and give everyone huge raises. It doesn't take a finance degree to figure that out.

Get ready for the next $1000 permanent parcel tax. It's coming.

Some insights from the report on the Woodside School District Board's discussion of a potential parcel tax:

" Board members asked about the two parcel tax measures that failed to get the required two-thirds approval in the Menlo Park City School District last month.

"What happened last month in Menlo Park?" asked board member Sylvia Edwards.

"Politically, my opinion, lack of a sunset," said Mr. Clifford, referring to the fact that the measures had no expiration dates.

Audience members who had been in contact with those who headed the campaign in Menlo Park said they also believed that having a special election had hurt them.

Audience members also urged not putting the measure on the November ballot.

"We have more control over the electorate if there's a much lower turnout," an audience member said. If more parents vote, "the likelihood is they're more likely to say yes," she said. In an election with higher turnout, such as the November election, "we have to work really, really hard to get people who don't have kids currently in the school to say yes," she said."

Web Link

""Politically, my opinion, lack of a sunset," said Mr. Clifford, referring to the fact that the measures had no expiration dates."

That's only one of about 18 reasons it didn't pass. Those 18 questions to the board, that to this day, have never been answered. Rest assured until they are there will continue to be a bunch of people that will oppose another parcel tax.

Here is another excellent assessment of why so many school taxes were passed this week:

Web Link

However the article includes this very MP pertinent comment:
"Governments that are desperate but not transparent, inclusive or responsive may be disappointed, he said. "If you just throw it up on the ballot wall, it's not going to stick and is going to get voted down," he said. What's required, he said, is "a thoughtful process that helps people understand what their money is going to go for. Then people are more willing to vote for it."