The San Bruno Park School District is looking for support on two ballot measures this November, one establishing term limits for board members and the other a parcel tax to help update curriculum and technology, and increase teacher salaries.
Measure X is looking to establish an annual tax of $68 per parcel for a period of eight years, generating $730,000 annually.
The revenue would go toward science, technology, engineering, art and math programming, and offering competitive wages to promote teacher and counselor retention at each of its five schools, said board President Raymond Giusti.
“What we’re asking for is very reasonable,” Giusti said. “It’s eye opening when you see just what other communities give.”
San Bruno Park is the only elementary district in the county that does not have a consistent and dedicated source of local funding. However, a bond measure passed in 2018 and has helped upgrade facilities.
“There’s been a long-term issue of the school board, the district and the community,” Giusti said. “Up until the bond measure, I think we were never synching at the right time. We synched then and I think we’ve done a pretty good job showing the community what we can do with that money.”
The district teeters the line between being community funded or state funded, which is “inherently unstable,” Giusti said.
“This is a recognition asking can we stabilize that a little more,” Giusti said. “Certainly an investment, however small, is a good start. It’s a recognition that education is important. This is our future that we’re trying to educate here.”
Regardless if a district flips designation, staff retention is particularly hard in an area where rents are high and other districts can offer more competitive wages, Giusti said. The parcel tax revenue, unlike a bond measure, can go toward salaries.
“We should be able to support them in a way that makes the district stable and benefits everybody,” Giusti said.
Updating curriculum and technology to be more robust and support STEAM learning is essential, and the district is working with curriculum writers to make sure it is equitable, accessible and addresses the core subject areas sufficiently, Giusti said.
“We have to be ready for the next rounds of advancements,” Giusti said. “If we don’t have our kids prepared for what future prospects are out there, we’re not helping.”
Two schools in the district — Allen Elementary and Belle Air Elementary — are designated as Title I schools, which Giusti said “certainly require a bit more attention,” but the tax revenue will address these focus areas equitably at each of its five schools.
Recommended for you
“Just because our schools have that designation, that doesn’t minimize or ignore the realities of the other two elementary schools we have,” he said. “Also, our middle school doesn’t have that recognition but it’s by far our biggest school.”
Though some hesitation may arise from residents who might not have direct ties to the district to support the funding measure, Giusti said it’s an investment in a public resource that helps all.
“For a community that says we’re a ‘community with a heart,’ this is an investment in that community,” Giusti said. “In our more disadvantaged neighborhoods, the school is the only resource people have for food or stability. We do a good job at supporting that now, our ask is to help stabilize that.”
The term limits measure — Measure O — looks to ultimately increase community participation in the district and allow for “new eyes” through establishing a cap of three terms for its Board of Trustees.
If passed, trustees can serve three four-year terms in a row, and can only return after not serving for four years.
“There’s a recognition that in some communities, you’re not going to have a lot of people interested in the position,” Giusti said. “If you’re interested, that’s great, but having change is good too, so every couple years we give someone else a chance.”
The required turnover of board members looks to promote an interest from community members who may feel their voice or perspective isn’t always represented on the board, Giusti said.
“After a set number of terms, somebody new has to come in, so there’s your chance if you feel something is not working,” he said.
With Superintendent Matthew Duffy now serving for more than two years after a revolving door of administrators, and consistent leadership at the middle school, Giusti said these measures reflect that the district is at a “turning point” and able to establish synchronicity with the community.
“We’re doing as much good as we can, let’s get some help, Giusti said. “Without a doubt, the majority of people in the community trust the school district to have their students go here. This is a recognition of that trust to say ‘hey, this is a full long-term partnership now.’”
(650) 344-5200 ext. 106

(2) comments
I recommend everyone vote NO on Measure X. It’s obvious that San Bruno is not fiscally responsible. Remember, this is the San Bruno who wasted taxpayer money on holding cease-fire resolution discussions. This is the San Bruno who paid for a parcel tax study with taxpayer money to, of all things, study increasing taxes on residents. This is the San Bruno who received $70 million, wasting 70+% on a recreation center that will likely serve a small portion of San Brunans (Bruno-ans?). This is the San Bruno who has blown $4 million to get folks to pay for downtown parking. Lots of money wasted that wasn’t used for updating curriculum and technology, and increasing teacher salaries.
Vote NO on this Measure and if you have voter remorse, wait for the next election cycle and you’ll see another measure looking for more of your money. Money that likely will mostly, if not all, go to paying ever increasing pensions and benefits. Once you agree to this parcel tax, chances are, San Bruno will want to extend it into the next century.
While I agree with voting NO on this measure, and agree that I feel San Bruno has wastes a ton of money on thing that should have gone to infrastructure, and that the city councils seem a little incompetent in regards to squandering improvements to San Bruno Cable (CityNet), I will push back on the Recreation Center as I have been using the facility since it opened to residents and have to say that each day it is getting busier and busier. I am worried thought that the current city council will not use the money effectively, and also worried that they will not maintain the Recreation Center.
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.