The failure of Measure Y in March 2017 spelled the end of a 2010 $209 a year parcel tax that provided about $7 million of the San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District’s $100 million budget.
The district has been aching to get that money back since and have faced some tough choices. Core programs and staffing levels are in peril without the extra revenue and the district is now asking voters for a $298 parcel tax through Measure V. Baked into the measure is money for teacher raises, but exactly how much is still subject to dispute between administrators and the teaching union. If this measure fails, look for the relationship to be further strained. And the end result will be a loss for the primary focus of the school district — which is educating the more than 12,000 students in San Mateo and Foster City.
But the bottom line is that the district is facing a $5 million structural deficit, and the $10 million a year the tax will generate will solve that and help retain the core programs on which so many in the district rely.
Though nothing has been decided, that could mean counseling, physical education and electives. In this day and age and in this area, having a school district contemplating such things as extras is no longer tenable.
And yet the opponents to this measure parade out the oft-repeated mantras like “don’t reward failure” and “make do with less.” In a perfect world, sure. But in this world, in which school funding is as complicated as an Italian language manual for a fighter jet, and can turn just as quickly depending on unstable sources of revenue and the whims of Sacramento, not having a stable source of local revenue just doesn’t make sense.
Recommended for you
The funding for teacher salaries in an area facing an atmospheric cost of living and programs for our children is not an experiment with which to be tinkered.
This measure replaces and adds to a measure that provided a balm after the Great Recession which dropped school funding to scarce levels and that is only just getting back to levels prior to the greatest financial crisis this nation has seen in decades.
The San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District is large and also incredibly diverse, with pockets of affluence and areas with low-income families struggling to make ends meet. While some school communities have the ability and wherewithal to raise money for lost programming, less affluent school communities are at a disadvantage — which would create inequity within the school district with less opportunity for the district to plug those gaps.
Now is not the time to cut. Measure V is an investment. Vote yes.
“Don’t reward failure” is oft repeated for a reason. School scores in a tailspin because no changes are made to failed policies. NO on V until the district has a plan for success. Why throw good money after bad?
Since there was a parcel tax of $209 per year beginning in 2010, where can I find information showing what occurred as a result of those funds? A detailed breakdown of the finances spent on pensions and their healthcare vs. operational use for programs and how students are now scoring higher resulting from the monies from that parcel tax would be helpful, and may help people make a more educated decision.
Otherwise, without this information, Measure V seems to be just another investment into shoring up pensions and promised healthcare benefits to retired educators and administrators who will have no effect on programs or better educational results for our children. As long as people are aware that a Yes vote on Measure V will pay for retired educators and administrators, and not educate or benefit students, then they should vote Yes on the Measure.
How much of the structural deficit is caused by education budgets going more and more to past pension and healthcare liabilities to retired educators. It is our duty and right to question the structure, culture and expenses of our school district. If we can get an answer on that, we would not be so quick to vote NO. Many us do not like our educational system and feel that is poorly run. Until changes are made, no more money. Remember, it is our hard earned money they are after, tax increases should not be automatic and we are demanding accountability now before another penny in taxes is approved.
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.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(5) comments
“Don’t reward failure” is oft repeated for a reason. School scores in a tailspin because no changes are made to failed policies. NO on V until the district has a plan for success. Why throw good money after bad?
Since there was a parcel tax of $209 per year beginning in 2010, where can I find information showing what occurred as a result of those funds? A detailed breakdown of the finances spent on pensions and their healthcare vs. operational use for programs and how students are now scoring higher resulting from the monies from that parcel tax would be helpful, and may help people make a more educated decision.
Otherwise, without this information, Measure V seems to be just another investment into shoring up pensions and promised healthcare benefits to retired educators and administrators who will have no effect on programs or better educational results for our children. As long as people are aware that a Yes vote on Measure V will pay for retired educators and administrators, and not educate or benefit students, then they should vote Yes on the Measure.
When is the last time Chris attended a school board meeting? Perhaps if you share your ideas with them them directly they will listen.
How much of the structural deficit is caused by education budgets going more and more to past pension and healthcare liabilities to retired educators. It is our duty and right to question the structure, culture and expenses of our school district. If we can get an answer on that, we would not be so quick to vote NO. Many us do not like our educational system and feel that is poorly run. Until changes are made, no more money. Remember, it is our hard earned money they are after, tax increases should not be automatic and we are demanding accountability now before another penny in taxes is approved.
Ahhh yes, Mr. Conway........thank you for bringing up the long over-looked "elephant in the room." Under-funded liabilities.
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.