Polling: Support for school tax

That support dropped to 64 percent — just below the supermajority required to pass — if the district pursued a $398 tax spanning the same period of time, according to a report presented to officials Monday, March 26.

School board President Audrey Ng said it is heartening to find voters’ apparent willingness to support a tax.

“The results came back very positive for the potential parcel tax and we were definitely excited,” she said, adding the polling encouraged officials to continue examining the measure’s viability. No decision was made at the meeting.

District officials have been scrambling for a tax following the March 2017 narrow failure of Measure Y, a previous $209 parcel tax proposed to span nine years. The proposal fell one percentage point short of the threshold for approval. The vote pre-empted the expiration of one of the district’s previous parcel taxes, which generated about $7 million annually.

Revenue from parcel taxes can be paid toward operating costs and programmatic enhancements, unlike the district’s bond measure fund which pays toward addressing campus facilities.

Officials have said the parcel tax measure is essential to offset a structural deficit, which is expected to grow as large as $9 million over the coming two years. Beyond the tax being considered, the district maintains a perpetual $104 parcel tax passed in 1991 which generates about $3.5 million annually.

Without the measure under examination, officials would likely need to look into cutting more than $5 million per year over the next two years to balance the budget, according to the report.

The report claims the measure would help pay teachers a living wage in an area becoming increasingly difficult for educators to afford. Polling results show appeals to helping attract and retain quality teachers are among the most effective campaign pitches.

Funding an ability to improve curriculum, reduce class sizes and support enrichment programs were among the other most useful appeals tested against potential voters, according to the report.

Support for the $298 measure, standing to generated as much as $10 million annually, floated as high as 77 percent in some instances, but those figures dropped once a duration for the tax was identified. The highest the $398 tax polled was 72 percent, and support fell as low as 63 percent when a 15-year duration was tested. If the district were able to pass the higher tax, it would generate roughly $13 million annually.

Ng said officials are yet to determine which measure they may pursue, claiming further examination is due.

Considering the general support for the measure though, Godbe suggested it was suitable to put it on the fall ballot.

“Given the survey findings, Godbe Research and BMWL recommend that the San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District continue the process to prepare for a November 2018 election,” according to the report, also referring to a consultant in the polling process.

Should officials wish to pursue the tax this fall, they would need to approve floating it by the summer.

Pursuit of local school tax measures have become increasingly common, as education officials seek additional sources of revenue to backfill funding gaps left by allocations from Sacramento. The elementary school districts in Millbrae as well as Belmont and Redwood Shores are seeking tax increases on the June ballot, and the San Bruno Park Elementary as well as San Mateo Union High school districts are examining future taxes as well.

Ng noted polling showed support for her district’s measure tested well even with an assumption that there would be competing tax floated on a coming ballot.

Considering the positive feedback, Ng said officials plan to continue examining the tax viability over the coming weeks.

“We are taking steps forward based on these results,” she said.

austin@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 105