BSD: Caught between two parcel taxes

As the B'game School District trustees look at options for more funding, the same fatigue I wrote about here three-and-a-half years ago is still lingering.  The story gets more complicated by a competing proposal as reported in the DJ.  The first proposal extends the old 2014 Measure L (not the recent SMUSHD L) that you see on the property tax bills that arrived this week.  You see all of four current school-related line items on the bill.  The other proposal is different.

During a meeting Tuesday, Oct. 10, trustees discussed their options for possibly extending and increasing Measure L, a $256 per year per parcel tax passed in 2014. The measure is set to expire by 2030 but the board can decide to ask voters for a renewal ahead of time.

Also up for consideration was whether the board had an interest in endorsing a parent-led movement to pass a citizens’ initiative and whether doing so would be legal. That effort is being led by John Wood and Bryant McLaughlin, parents of Roosevelt Elementary School students, and if passed would charge property owners about 8 cents per square foot per parcel or $80 per vacant parcel, generating about $2 million annually. Someone with a 5,000-square-foot parcel would pay $400 a year.

Per some consultant

While a citizens’ initiative needs a simple majority to pass, the district would have no control over how that citizen measure was crafted. Meanwhile, a district measure would need a two-thirds vote for approval but it would get to use its resources to poll the community before developing ballot language, he said.

The city and district would likely need to develop a memorandum of understanding regarding the citizens’ initiative including a possible reimbursement plan for the city fronting the money for the ballot measure (Ed: $330K-448K) were the citizens’ initiative to be put before voters and other oversight grounds if it were approved.

The moving parts are what sort of tax format to use (rates, sunset clauses, etc) and who manages and oversees the monies (the City or the District).  Back in 2020, the bond Measure O passed with 60.17%, well above the 55% needed, so there is already $25 per $100,000 of assessed (not market) value per year in place.  And then there is the issue of getting it passed

Trustee Florence Wong also suggested the study look into whether the public would support the district’s measure with or without changes if another tax measure was on the ballot. Reflecting on previous failed attempts by the district to pass a tax measure, Wong said incremental or smaller changes appear to be more appealing to voters.

“People still remembered when the parcel taxes they tried to pass didn’t, so that’s a stinger when it doesn’t pass. There’s a lot of thought and anxiety about trying to add more taxes,” Wong said. “I feel very confident people would be supportive of continuing what we have.”

She's right.  When the four flavors of tax already total to two grand per year, there is uncertainty about adding more.

Comments

[Spurinna]

SMDJ front page today reports that student academic scores haven’t improved in years…

Byline: Sierra Lopez

[Mom]

The article says Belmont and San Carlos did better but nothing on Burlingame. Searching for the scores with Google was a dead end. Does anyone know where to find them?

[HMB]

Did you try the state site? https://www.cde.ca.gov/Ta/tg/ca/

[HMB]

This one is more user friendly, I think:
https://caaspp.edsource.org/

[Joe]

Thanks HMB. That second one is good. The overall results look very much the same as last year. English scores are down less than a percent and math up less than a percent, but there are much larger moves at the school level. BIS is similar while BHS had some improvement in English and a lot in math.

[Joe]

Per John Horgan's column yesterday an agreement has been reached although what it is was not made clear:

Advocates for increased funding for the Burlingame School District are breathing a sigh of relief this week. A potential rift between proponents of two different parcel tax plans has been avoided, at least for now.

The agreement to cooperate, rather than compete, was worked out late last month, according to Lisa Mudd, president of the district’s Board of Trustees.

“We are working together, in partnership” she said. “It’s not in the best interest of the district to have two parcel taxes (up for discussion). … It’s best to join forces.”

[Joe]

John Horgan saved me the work of going to look for the most recent school funding figures by printing them in his June 12th column. Here's the pecking order from lowest to hightest:

Here are the state’s most up-to-date per child expenditure figures, ranked lowest to highest:

• Belmont-Redwood Shores Elementary, $14,689
• Millbrae Elementary, $15,113
• Pacifica Elementary, $15,118

• Burlingame Elementary, $15,615

• Jefferson Elementary, $17.084
• San Carlos Elementary, $17,291
• San Bruno Park Elementary, $18,511
• Cabrillo Unified, $18,912
• South San Francisco Unified, $18,988
• San Mateo-Foster City Elementary, $19,975
• Bayshore Elementary, $20,339
• Redwood City Elementary, $21,293
• Jefferson Union High, $22.687

• San Mateo Union High, $25,245

• Brisbane Elementary, $25,564
• Menlo Park City Elementary, $26,348
• Sequoia Union High, $26,951
• Hillsborough City Elementary, $29,244
• Las Lomitas Elementary, $30,878
• La Honda-Pescadero Unified, $32,226
• Portola Valley Elementary, $34,945
• Ravenswood City Elementary, $35,551
• Woodside Elementary, $37,788

Woodside is 257% of Belmont-Redwood Shores.........