NOTE TO READERS: This column has been corrected. Measure GG cannot be increased or decreased, depending on fiscal circumstances.
Public school districts in San Mateo County aren’t shy about asking their taxpayers to shell out more money for their operations and facilities. It has become almost a tradition. The Nov. 5 election ballot is no exception.
There are no fewer than 12 education fiscal measures up for voter approval next month, seven parcel taxes and five bond packages. They are being requested by districts from Pacifica in the north to Menlo Park in the south. It’s a taxing buffet.
If the voters in those 11 districts give the OK to the dozen proposals, the bonds would generate a total of $555 million and the parcel taxes would produce an estimated annual haul of $14 million.
The list of districts and their proposed levies looks like this:
• Bayshore Elementary — Measure HH, a bond package worth $12.5 million, taxed at $30 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
• Belmont-Redwood Shores Elementary — Measure P, a bond package worth $171 million, taxed at $29 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
• Burlingame Elementary — Measure GG, a “special” (parcel) tax set at 14 cents per square foot ($210 for a 1,500-square-foot home, with a $2,500 cap for much larger properties) to raise $3.6 million annually for eight years on top of an existing $256 parcel tax (which is scheduled to expire in 2030).
• Cabrillo Unified — Measure K, a bond package worth $153.4 million, taxed at $55 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
• Cabrillo Unified — Measure P, a parcel tax set at $198 per parcel (replacing an existing $150 per property levy) to raise $2.14 million annually for eight years.
• Jefferson Union High — Measure Z, a parcel tax set at $95 per parcel to produce $3.3 million for 10 years.
• Menlo Park City Elementary — Measure U, a bond package worth $123.6 million, taxed at $18.60 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
Recommended for you
• Millbrae Elementary — Measure J, a bond package worth $95 million, taxed at $30 per $100,000 of assessed valuation.
• Pacifica Elementary — Measure EE, a parcel tax set at $98 per property (with yearly adjustments) to generate $1.1 million annually for eight years.
• Ravenswood City Elementary — Measure S, a parcel tax to renew and increase an existing levy to $434 per parcel to produce $2.7 million per year for eight years.
• San Bruno Park Elementary — Measure X, a parcel tax set at $68 per parcel to provide $730,000 annually for eight years.
• Woodside Elementary — Measure Y, a parcel tax to continue an existing parcel tax at $366.66 per property to raise $392,000 for 12 years.
Bond measures will require at least a 55% positive vote from the electorate for passage. Parcel taxes will need a yes vote by at least two-thirds of those voting for approval. There are exemptions for senior citizens (and, in some cases, disabled, low-income individuals) written into parcel tax ballot language.
To calculate a bond measure’s projected impact on your property tax, note its specified assessed value on your most recent tax statement, divide that figure by $100,000 and multiply that new number by the listed dollars-per-parcel amount to get your bond measure’s expected total.
For example, a property assessed at $1 million in the Cabrillo Unified School District would be taxed $550 (10x$55) if Measure K were to be approved next month.
Voting by mail has already begun in San Mateo County.
NEW SAN CARLOS SPORTS BAR: Thanks to Mike Chanteloup for pointing out that the downtown San Carlos property that once housed Sneakers American Grill, quite popular in its heyday, will soon welcome a new sports-themed enterprise, Highlands Sports Bar & Grill. Good news. Still, we do continue to miss the old MBJ Ranch Room (“Home of the Hoagie”) that once graced that same commercial district in a town with the apt motto “City of Good Living.”
HALL OF FAME NOMINATIONS: Nominations for inclusion in the Peninsula Sports Hall of Fame are now being accepted. If you have a nominee, please email his or her credentials to the email address below. The Hall of Fame has been in existence since 1989. Its 2025 induction ceremony is scheduled to be held in June. The event is presented each year by the San Mateo County Historical Association.
John Horgan, who has been writing about San Mateo County’s ins and outs since 1963, beginning modestly at the long-gone Burlingame Advance Star, can be contacted by email at johnhorganmedia@gmail.com.
(6) comments
Does anyone ever wonder how these school districts arrive at the bond or parcel tax amount? It appears to be driven by anxious board members and bond underwriters. But in my case, as a Belmont resident, I am always thrilled to see yet another annual major upgrade at the Ralston Middle School parking lot. Lord knows what they do with the already available funding. Even with declining enrollment, the District is insatiable as if to keep up with the Joneses. Vote NO on this ripoff.
Thanks, Mr. Horgan, for a recap of the numerous parcel taxes and bond packages. I’d recommend everyone vote NO on all of these fiscal measures. It’s highly likely that most, if not all, the proceeds from your hard earned money will go towards paying raises and ever increasing pensions and benefits, with little to nothing going towards the “kids” or their education. BTW, if, “There are exemptions for senior citizens (and, in some cases, disabled, low-income individuals) written into parcel tax ballot language,” then these folks should not be allowed to vote on their associated fiscal measures. Someone should check into the legality of those exemptions.
Many people are not aware that a bond is a loan paid back by a tax by both renters and property owners. Most people are not aware that it typically costs twice the amount borrowed to pay back the loan because of interest.
Prop 39 passed by the voters in 2000 reduced the threshold on school bonds from 2/3s majority to 55%.
Prop 5 is on the ballot this year and if passed it will do the same.
VOTE NO ON PROP 5.
PROP 5 applies to infrastructure and affordable housing. Affordable housing is a scam. It increases the cost of housing for all.
We need choice as to where we send our education dollar. competition is a key.
All these school districts are super rich. Each one of them has a way higher per-student funding than countries in Europe and Asia. They all spend money on various side-projects these days and less than 40% of their investments actually go to students and their education.
Just look at all these great athletic fields, swimming pools, wellness centers, administrative offices, etc. they have.
At the same time they keep students' performance and outcomes artificially low so they can keep blaming lack-of-money for all their troubles.
They don't ask for money because they need it, they ask for money because voters are easy voters don't pay enough attention.
It is OK to so NO to school districts. They could always dismantle all districts and safe the community a lot of money if they really cared about the children.
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.