Advocates for public schools are looking for help from the Legislature to blunt the impact of a ruling earlier this month jeopardizing a number
of parcel tax measures supporting districts statewide.
Not exact matches
By contrast, only one
of the other 17
parcel tax measures around the state passed in the last election.
Local
parcel taxes are one way that communities may supplement state funding for education, and lowering the vote threshold will make passage
of these
measures more likely.
Of particular importance on the legislative agenda this year, is Senate Constitutional Amendment 3 (SCA 3) introduced by Senator Mark Leno, which would lower the vote threshold for local school district
parcel tax measures from 2/3 to 55 percent.
How Things Should Happen The life cycle
of a
parcel tax like
Measure G1 has three important phases:
If a
measure to increase local
parcel taxes for public schools were on the ballot, about half
of likely voters (48 %) would vote yes — a level
of support far short
of the two - thirds majority needed to pass a local
parcel tax.
If the
parcel tax measure receives the approval
of two - thirds
of the voters, it would cost homeowners $ 120 annually for 10 years, raising an estimated $ 12.5 million each year for the School District.
West Contra Costa resident Fatima Alleyne, a member
of the Budget Advisory Committee, is raising questions about how the school district is spending its
Measure G
parcel tax money.
Critics also noted that voters passed another
parcel tax —
Measure G — just six months ago and argued that the generosity
of Oakland property owners might have worn thin.
Oakland's next superintendent is responsible for effectively investing $ 24 million annually
of new local
parcel tax revenue, made possible by the support
of Oakland voters in 2014 (
Measure N — College & Career Readiness for All Act) and 2016 (
Measure G1 — Teacher Retention & Middle School Improvement Act).