Click on right here for a whole checklist of our election suggestions.
5 suburban East Bay faculty districts are looking for voter approval to borrow $1 billion for college building. To pay that off, with curiosity, they might want to elevate $2.3 billion from new property taxes over the subsequent three many years.
It’s a nasty time to hunt extra taxes to rebuild, broaden or refurbish colleges. Forecasts usually present declining pupil enrollment within the years forward. Inflation is already consuming away at family budgets. And the nation is teetering on the sting of recession.
Sure, some colleges would profit from overhauls or replacements. However this can be a time to give attention to making do, to focus consideration on pedagogy slightly than aesthetics of the school rooms. After a two-decade increase in class building, for which property homeowners will already face larger tax payments for years to return, it’s time to provide it a relaxation.
On the very least, with a lot cash at stake, faculty districts needs to be absolutely clear with voters about the price of the bond borrowing. However they’re not.
Not one of many Nov. 8 measures even mentions the phrase “tax” within the abstract on the poll. Schooling leaders so badly torture the syntax of the abstract to keep away from utilizing the T phrase that it ought to make highschool English academics cringe.
Associated editorial: How faculty districts might be clear with voters
Faculty officers declare that the 75-word restrict for poll measures retains them from clearly explaining to voters the quantity of the tax for bond measures. It’s not very laborious, in the event that they solely tried. Right here is an instance.
Every of those measures includes the district issuing bonds. That’s not free cash. It’s a type of borrowing. The cash must be paid again — and that requires tax will increase.
The tax quantities within the measures are substantial, additional driving up the already excessive value of homeownership. They arrive on high of one other $1 billion of taxes to repay excellent debt for prior bond measures and, for 3 of the districts, extra annual parcel taxes to complement faculty operations. These are additionally particulars the districts don’t point out.
Whereas it was not determinative, the misleading poll language employed by the districts performed a key function in our analysis this 12 months.
As we clarify intimately beneath, we advocate voters reject Livermore Measure G, Martinez Measure Okay, Pleasanton Measure I and Walnut Creek Measure J.
Nevertheless, voters ought to again Measure J within the tiny Sunol Glen district. There, not like the opposite districts, they haven’t sought voter approval for a school-construction bond since 1999, and the tax funds on these bonds are about to finish.
Over the previous decade, we’ve repeatedly mentioned that the quantity of the taxes needs to be clearly spelled out within the abstract that seems on the poll. The Alameda County grand jury has condemned the present deceitful practices.
We’ve even supplied recommended wording — and accomplish that once more at this time — to display that, opposite to highschool officers’ claims, they will, inside the 75-word restrict, describe their measures, make express that they contain elevating taxes and specify in phrases readers can perceive the quantity of the tax. We’ve bolstered the message by spelling out the deceitful practices to keep away from.
Since we started urgent this subject, there was some small reform of the state regulation governing ballot-measure wording for tax will increase, regardless of the fierce opposition of the varsity board affiliation. Nonetheless, as soon as once more this 12 months, the poll wording stays opaque.
The quantity of the tax is included within the poll abstract for all 5 measures as a result of the regulation now requires it. But it surely’s by no means recognized as a tax. For these unfamiliar with how bonds work, they’re simply numbers of unspecified significance.
Furthermore, these numbers are designed to make the taxes appear financially inconsequential once they’re not. The quantity of the tax for a college bond measure relies on the assessed worth of the property being taxed. However in 4 of the 5 instances this 12 months, faculty officers attempt to make the quantity appear small by expressing it as cents per $100 of assessed worth slightly than {dollars} per $100,000 of assessed worth, which is easier to translate and the frequent manner such taxes are normally mentioned.
It’s time to finish this deceit. Sadly, elected faculty leaders, faculty superintendents, legal professionals and bond business advisors received’t do it on their very own. And we are able to’t make them do the best factor. However till they display transparency, they need to not rely on our help at election time.
Livermore Measure G – No
Measure G would authorize $450 million of bonds to be paid again over 34 years with curiosity, bringing the overall to $1 billion. Property taxpayers nonetheless owe $369 million in principal and curiosity on two prior voter-approved bond measures.
Till 2057, property homeowners would pay a median $57 yearly for each $100,000 of assessed worth to repay the Measure G debt, and a complete $83 per $100,000 assessed worth for all excellent bonds.
For a house with a district median assessed worth of $580,000, that works out to about $479. Property homeowners additionally pay a $138 annual particular parcel tax for district operations.
The district says the bond-money spending will embody building tasks at Rancho Las Positas and Marilyn Avenue elementary colleges and new classroom buildings at Junction Avenue Okay-8 Faculty and Granada and Livermore excessive colleges.
However we’re troubled by the shortage of transparency. The district hasn’t put out a funds for the tasks, which it says are a part of the district’s grasp plan. That, the troubling poll language, the 2 prior excellent tax measures and the difficult financial occasions drive our advice to oppose the measure.
Martinez Measure Okay – No
Measure Okay would authorize $90 million of bonds to be paid again over 35 years, with curiosity, bringing the overall to about $201 million. Property taxpayers nonetheless owe $242 million in principal and curiosity on two prior voter-approved bond measures.
Till 2057, property homeowners would pay a median $39 yearly for each $100,000 of assessed worth to repay the Measure Okay debt. Extra instantly, for the primary 10 years, they might pay annually a median $141 per $100,000 assessed worth for all excellent bonds.
For a house with a district median assessed worth of $399,000, that works out to about $563 yearly. Property homeowners additionally pay a $75 annual particular parcel tax for district operations that can expire in 2024.
Whereas we admire the intent of the capital-improvement program, voters have already handed two bond measures since 2010, and the district tasks a 13% decline in pupil enrollment between 2017-18 and 2024-25.
We additionally observe that district has used bond cash to outfit each faculty with photo voltaic panels however has not directed the ensuing $3.5 million vitality financial savings to date towards compensation of the bonds. Fairly the financial savings has been funneled into the final fund, successfully making the bond program an oblique subsidy to the final fund — and lacking a chance to scale back taxpayer bond prices.
Pleasanton Measure I – No
Measure I might authorize $395 million of bonds to be paid again over 31 years with curiosity, bringing the overall to $791 million. Property taxpayers nonetheless owe $278 million in principal and curiosity on a bond measure voters authorised in 2016.
For the brand new debt, property homeowners would pay till 2054 a median $49 yearly for each $100,000 of assessed worth. From now till 2042, when the 2016 bond is paid off, the overall tax invoice for college bonds would common about $89 per $100,000 assessed worth. For a house with a district common assessed worth of $959,500, that may be about $856 yearly.
District officers have recognized about $1 billion of wanted capital enhancements. Their precedence checklist will decide the Measure I spending and unfold the enhancements to each faculty within the district.
In 2020, the district didn’t win sufficient voter help to move an identical $323 million bond measure. Fairly than trim again this time throughout difficult financial occasions, the district is asking for more cash. That’s politically tone deaf.
Sunol Glen Measure J – Sure
Measure J, a $10.9 million bond proposal, modifies a 2020 measure that, with 51% help, fell shy of the 55% threshold required for college bonds.
The 2020 measure known as for funds on new bonds to start earlier than outdated bonds, authorised in 1999, have been retired, leading to a close to doubling of the school-bond property tax levy for 4 years. Measure J begins the 33 years of latest funds after the outdated bonds are retired in 2024.
The brand new tax can be about $52 for each $100,000 of assessed worth, barely lower than the present charge. For a house with a district common assessed worth of about $592,000 that works out to $308 yearly.
The district’s important faculty constructing, which serves about 300 college students, is sort of a century outdated and wishes roof, electrical, plumbing, sewer, heating and air-con restore and updating. Bonds would additionally fund modernizing the cafeteria and setting up a brand new expertise, engineering and math lab.
Regardless of the troubling poll language, the district’s fiscal restraint on faculty building justifies help of this measure.
Walnut Creek Measure J – No
Measure J would authorize $134 million of bonds to be paid again over 32 years, with curiosity, bringing the overall to about $272 million.
Property taxpayers nonetheless owe on beforehand issued faculty building bonds for the Walnut Creek district, which covers by means of the eighth grade, and the Acalanes Excessive Faculty District, in addition to paying annual parcel taxes to assist fund each districts’ operations.
The tax for the Measure J bonds can be about $22 for each $100,000 of assessed worth. For a house with a district median assessed worth of about $657,000, that works out to $144 yearly. Add within the different particular faculty taxes and the overall can be about $921 in 2024.
Measure J is the second part of the varsity district’s faculty building program that started with voter approval in 2016 of a $60 million bond. The budgeting for the subsequent part may be very tough. Furthermore, the choice to hunt greater than twice as a lot as six years in the past is ill-timed for the present financial system.
