Two local school districts are seeking parcel taxes which officials claim are needed to fill the funding gap left by inadequate allocations from the state, while tax critics claim the initiatives are unnecessary.
The Belmont-Redwood Shores and Millbrae elementary school districts are both floating in the June 5 election tax measures funding operations, which opponents believe are undeserved.
Michael Milliken, superintendent of the Belmont-Redwood Shores Elementary School District, said his school system’s measure deserves local support to build on insufficient state financing.
“We are facing challenges of trying to provide a quality program with below-average income,” he said.
Karen Chin, who is leading the campaign for the tax benefiting the Millbrae Elementary School District, echoed a similar sentiment in advocating for her district’s effort.
“This is needed to protect the quality of education in Millbrae,” she said. “And there is a lot of need in the school district.”
In the Belmont-Redwood Shores Elementary School District, officials are seeking support for a $118 annual parcel tax designed to span five years and would generate $1.4 million annually.
A $97 parcel tax will be floated to Millbrae voters, as officials are asking for a measure slated to generate about $700,000 over its five-year life.
Meanwhile, Mark Hinkle, an ardent critic of tax proposals proposed throughout the county, claims Millbrae schools should consider cost-cutting measures before asking residents for more money.
“The district administration wants more of your hard-earned money to pad their salaries and fat pension plans,” said Hinkle, in an opposition argument filed with the county Elections Office.
Hinkle, a Gilroy resident and president of the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, made a similar argument in his opposition to the Belmont-Redwood Shores initiative as well.
“Tell the Belmont-Redwood Shores School District Board to be fiscally responsible by voting no on Measure K,” wrote Hinkle, who authored the only arguments against either measure filed with the county.
Rahila Passi, vice president of the Belmont-Redwood Shores school board, dismissed the validity of Hinkle’s concerns by noting that he is not a San Mateo County resident.
To the concerns regarding fiscal responsibility though, Milliken said officials are committed to keeping a close eye on the district’s budget to assure they are not balancing the budget on the backs of taxpayers.
Beyond the parcel tax request, he said officials are raising money through the district’s education foundation, which usually generates in the neighborhood of about $1.7 million.
Officials are mindful of operating expenses as well, said Milliken, as the district is examining up to $1 million in future budget reductions to maintain a balanced budget. Should the tax fail, that figure could jump to more than $2 million, he said.
Recommended for you
Millbrae Superintendent Vahn Phayprasert expressed a similar commitment to fiscal conservatism amidst the request for financial support.
The district has been running on a shoestring budget, with limited supplementary programs such as art and physical education, with an eye to operating within its means, he said.
The district also leans on its parent foundation for extra support, but the burgeoning group generates roughly $500,000 annually, which is insufficient to fill the budget gap left by state funding.
“It’s a great source of funding, but it’s not enough and it’s not stable,” said Chin.
To that end, the budget of both districts is primarily filled through allocations from Sacramento. But with limited populations of students receiving free or reduced lunches or other demographics which can hike a district’s government financing, officials are left to look to their local community to beef up their operating budget.
“We don’t have many sources of income and a parcel tax is one of the main sources,” said Phayprasert, noting the district does not currently enjoy a parcel tax.
Belmont-Redwood Shores Elementary School District does receive revenue from another parcel tax measure, which voters approved to increase from $96 to $174 per parcel in 2008.
But with constantly climbing enrollment, as the student population has jumped from 2,400 students to 4,300 over the past dozen years, Milliken said the district needs more money to support additional students.
The financial need is enhanced by the requirement of school districts to boost their contribution to personnel retirement funds, said Milliken, of the obligation facing school systems across the state.
Passi said the campaign has been well received by local voters, spurring hope that the measure will gather the supermajority support required.
“We are very hopeful it will pass,” she said.
Chin shared a similar perspective.
“We have seen great support from the community and it’s been a very much positive response,” she said.
(650) 344-5200 ext. 105
(4) comments
Before asking for more money, how about a simple pie chart to see where the money is going now. The often repeated plea for more money is getting irksome to taxpayers who are being asked for more and more money. Voters need to know where the money they are giving is currently going, until that time, please vote no on any new revenue until they can prove that they are spending our money prudently.
Such financial information is usually available on most local school district websites...
Additionally, I wish the journal would do some research on how much the new developments are paying for school mitigation......
My gut tells me that it's way too low based on similar unmitigated development costs, such as the City of San Mateo's in-lieu parking fee structure.
I find it surprising that people like Hinkle who are not even residents of this area are allowed to write ballot arguments against local issues that have no impact on them personally. Thank you, Austin, for pointing out that he is a Gilroy resident. I am curious if the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association is any more than a single person entity that he organized to give himself a megaphone. Obviously, his opposition to these school measures is purely on ideological anti-tax grounds.
One also wonders if our crusader Christopher Conway, who reliably comments negatively online on all of these school stories, is in a similar situation. Or perhaps “he” is just a bot program automatically generating comments?!? 😉
Then we always have Jack Hinckey (sp?) who admitted in a previous DJ article that he thinks public schools should be a last resort after private and religious schools are used, but never publicly states these views in his numerous voter information pamphlet articles against school measures. Instead, it is always the same anti-tax, bloated public pensions screed.
I understand the need for the DJ to be fair and give both sides of an argument, but one hopes that readers understand the fringe nature of some of these opposing opinions.
They have a very negative impact on the clear majority of families that send their children to public schools.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.