School Parcel Taxes Fall Short of Two-Thirds Majority Needed for Approval

$16 million from Measures W and X would have funded smaller class sizes, supported education programs

Mark Ingalls and Lynn Rodriguez of the Measures W and X campaign committee discuss possible next steps for the Santa Barbara Unified School District after the two parcel taxes were defeated Tuesday night. (Alex Kacik / Noozhawk photo)

By Giana Magnoli, Noozhawk Staff Writer | @magnoli | updated logo 12:10 a.m. | Published on 06.05.2012 9:29 p.m.

(30)

Organizers of the Santa Barbara Unified School District’s $54-per-parcel tax campaign fought hard to get the two-thirds voter approval required to fund $16 million worth of student programs over the next four years, but fell short Tuesday night.

Measure X, for the elementary schools, got 65 percent approval, while Measure W, for secondary schools in both Santa Barbara and Goleta, garnered 64.3 percent approval. Both needed 66.7 percent of the vote to pass.

The two reasons they didn’t pass were the amount of funding the measures required and the election’s timing, said Lynn Rodriguez, Santa Barbara Education Foundation board president.

“They did pretty well, but we’re sad to lose,” she said. “The message will be that they are worth bringing back in November. The question is why they didn’t pass. There will be analysis of the precincts and what happened, but one of the issues could be the amount, and we all knew June would be challenging.”

The measures would have replaced 2008’s Measures H and I, which fund smaller class sizes and support math, science and technology education, as well as music and arts programs in both the elementary and secondary districts. The new taxes would also add career-training programs to secondary schools.

Santa Barbara School Board member Monique Límon said the board will have to analyze which programs to keep.

“It’s tough for more than 15,000 students that are not going to get those (art and music) programs,” Límon said. “But I believe that our board will regroup, that the community and the foundation will regroup and think what we can do to make sure we can provide those programs.”

The taxes would have lasted for four years, starting in 2013 when Measures H and I expire.

This year’s parcel taxes would have doubled the previous per-parcel amount and the campaign was the Santa Barbara Education Foundation’s third election initiative for the district, but the first in a June election. Godbe Research, the district’s election advisers, recommended a push for June since Gov. Jerry Brown’s tax hike initiative and others will be on the November ballot.

Godbe Research consultants found 72 percent approval among secondary district voters and 77 percent approval among elementary district voters in their polls presented to the Board of Education in January. The district has been successful in passing general obligation bond measures in addition to the parcel tax measures, and this is the first effort that failed to get enough community support to pass.

Meanwhile, the Buellton Union School District’s Measure V garnered 55.2 percent support with all county absentee ballots counted, just enough to meet the 55 percent threshold for approval. The bond measure would authorize the district to issue $3.2 million in bonds to improve student access to technology, make energy-efficient facility improvements, build new classrooms and upgrade school cafeterias.

— Noozhawk staff writer Giana Magnoli can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Follow Noozhawk on Twitter: @noozhawk, @NoozhawkNews and @NoozhawkBiz. Connect with Noozhawk on Facebook.

Comments

Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use

» Sy Prey on 06.05.12 @ 09:44 PM

It was right for both these measure to fail. Parcels taxes must be temporary stop-gap and dedicated short-term only. They should never become permanent property tax burdens. Measures X and W failed on these counts. This was the right choice for voters to make. Mourn it not. It was the right result.

» sbjoe on 06.05.12 @ 10:13 PM

I mourn it as should anyone with kids in the school district. Schools don’t run on air you know. The district has had an over 20% cut in the last five years. Enough of the cuts.

» lou segal on 06.05.12 @ 10:31 PM

If these Measures fail, and I hope they do; we will not have succeeded yet. The residents of SB need to demand school reform, which means the end of tenure and seniority. Hopefully, in a subsequent election we can have referendum to allow the voters to decide if they want teachers to have lifetime tenure, regardless of performance.

» Overtaxed Taxpayer on 06.06.12 @ 06:01 AM

This was another tax and more waste initiative, its time to admit we have a spending problem. Also illegal aliens and their millions of anchor babies crowding our schools.

» haskelslocal on 06.06.12 @ 07:07 AM

If you keep going to the well for funds, you’ll never stop depending on that source. State cutbacks are brutal, but school systems in their entirety need to be retooled.

» Alex Quinn on 06.06.12 @ 07:50 AM

When you run out of water, you do have to go back to the well. Schools have no money.

How many of you commenting here have kids in public school right now? How many of you have set foot on a public school campus in the last 5 years? What do you really know about it?

Changing rules on teacher tenure would have to happen at the state, not local level. Lou, that’s something productive you might do with all the extra time you spend repeating yourself here. Same for you Overtaxed—you could be quiet and work on changing federal immigration law since that’s your one concern in the world.

Public schools are necessary. If you don’t want taxes to pay for them, should we instead get direct payments from business since all business benefits from an educated labor pool? (huh, is that what ‘free market’ means? Ha. Everyone wants to talk about high taxes but always ignore all the things we get from taxes, and who benefits most from those things).

II say repeal Prop 13 and restore the property tax funding schools need to do their jobs. Of course all the selfish homeowners freak out over that idea. Yet they’re the ones benefitting greatly from taxpayer paid police, fire, roads, schools, etc.

Lastly, I know this post is pointless as none of the usual suspects on these comments ever meaningfully engage with opposing facts or ideas offered here. It’s as if their brains have developed an impervious shell of callouses as a result of thinking only about a few of the same (unsupported) opinions over the years. Or more likely, they just purposely block out anything that might call into question their cherished world view.

» BAB on 06.06.12 @ 08:03 AM

As Limon says, “...what we can do to make sure we can provide those programs.” Money isn’t always the answer. This is just the message from voters! More money isn’t all that is needed to solve the problems the school district is dealing with. Get to the root cause. Reduce overhead.

» citizenSB on 06.06.12 @ 08:34 AM

I voted yes on both, although I did have second thoughts for a couple of reasons.
1) why more than double the current amount? Seemed a bit greedy
2) what if Brown’s tax increase passes, do we have to pay for both?
3) When is the RDA money going to start flowing to the schools? And how much will that be?
I suspect #1 on it’s own might have lost the few percentage points tht kept this from passing

» lou segal on 06.06.12 @ 10:09 AM

Alex, To be honest with you, I really favor school choice. The govt monopoly of schools has failed and you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that. The money should should follow the students, not the bureaucracy. BTW, you’re wrong about waiting for state action to eliminate tenure and seniority. There is no reason why it can’t be done through local collective bargaining or local referendum. School choice would work, but you know the teacher unions will fight it to the death because it would mean the end of their lifetime job security.

You can be a shill for the unions if you like, but I will come down on the side of the kids every time. My only goal is to fix the the mess you guys have created over the years. The state already spends almost 50% of the budget on public schools, an abysmal cost/benefit ratio. Without wholesale reform, no amount of money is going to fix the schools. Someday these reforms will happen, unfortunately a generation of kids will lose out in the meantime. No reform, no money.

» JustBobF on 06.06.12 @ 12:03 PM

They didn’t pass because there are Republicans who refuse to vote for a tax increase. A 2/3 vote is ver difficult to get. We should lower this requirement to a simple majority. Let’s try again in November.

» Overtaxed Taxpayer on 06.06.12 @ 12:15 PM

How about Democrats live within their means, and we take on the illegal aliens breaking our laws daily. Until then shut up and give us choice>> vouchers now.

» lou segal on 06.06.12 @ 12:45 PM

Go ahead try again in Nov, although I will triple my efforts to defeat it again. This time I will actively campaign against the Measures and will increase my efforts to publicize the reform message for the schools. I don’t believe the public still fully understands the toxic impact the teachers unions have had on our schools. I will also attempt to get the ballot measures rewritten. The ballot language was not only biased but also factually incorrect. You had to laugh at the obvious spin.

» AN50 on 06.06.12 @ 01:00 PM

There is plenty of money for education people. This is a distribution problem plain and simple. Sacramento collects taxes for education and keeps the money for themselves and their union campaign funders. The local school system here has been battling this for decades now and even after numerous parcel tax increases it has not changed. Trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is insane.

Wisconsin democrats joined with their republican counterparts yesterday and sent public service unions a clear message, NO MORE. Voters here did the same thing on X and W. You have a chance next November to free the democrat party from its addiction to and corrupt relationship with union thugs by not sending those democrat politicians in bed with unions back to Sacramento. You do not have to give up on your liberal/progressive ideology just because you vote for the other party. But it does send a message to union bosses that they can no longer steal from your children, your schools or your communities for their own interests.

To those of you who hold the idea that republicans are in bed with business, you may be right, however, most businesses are beholden to the most powerful voting block in the country, the market place. If you stop buying crap from a business that is acting contrary to our general welfare they will change and damned fast and it won’t take a law, lawyers, politicians and back room dealing by union bosses to make it happen. This people, is real freedom, try it some time and find out for yourself.

» Sammy on 06.06.12 @ 02:20 PM

Who is “lou segal”?

» Rambler on 06.06.12 @ 03:39 PM

Who is Lou Segal? Who is Joh Galt! Father Lou is a priest of the Holy Church of No Change. You may criticize him for his beliefs, but they are founded on solid anecdotes! Though he knows few teachers, he has been taught many anecdotes about bad teachers.

Who is teaching our Children? Teachers. They are LAZY people who just want the summer off. The anecdotal evidence is well-established. One need go no further than the Holy TV Room to hear it.

This local tax of $54/year would only allow these Lazy teachers to focus their propaganda and Marxist Indoctrination more effectively.

» lou segal on 06.06.12 @ 04:26 PM

I happen to be married to a teacher in a private school (once worked in the public schools). Also very familiar with public schools in SB and have been saying these things for many years. You would have to have your head deep in the sand to not be aware of the very real problems with our public schools.

One thing that always amuses me about these debates is how many of the public school defenders send their children to private, parochial or charter schools. I wonder how many of the children of public school teachers go to public schools. I am sure that is the type of information which will never be revealed.

» Sy Prey on 06.06.12 @ 09:50 PM

The education well is not dry for goodness sakes. 50% of all tax dollars raised in this state is guaranteed to go to schools. This means $8000 per SB student today. If you want money, stop lying about mismanaging what you already get.

Word to the wise Tell your story about what taxpayers and students get for that $8000 first Let us understand that before you demand we pay you more.

Tell us why it takes 85-95% of that $8000 for personnel costs. perks, benefits, paid days off and release time and why that money is not better spent “in the class room” instead.

Tell your unions to back on creating more and more regulations that require more and more administrators to implement, monitor and enforce.

Voters, get rid of the union backed school board members in the next elections or else you will never see anything more than renewed demands for more and more taxation. With no quid pro quo promise of anything accountable in return.

Notice the Catch 22 we have been listening to for decades. Johnny can’t read because you don’t pay the teachers enough. This refrain started in the 1950s’. We poured in more money (see Prop 98) and all we got worse results. This contradiction needs to sink in, and the unions need to slink out.

Voters need to stop being stupid about school board elections. You have $8000 a year per student. Use it, and get Johnny to read.

» Alex Quinn on 06.07.12 @ 11:26 AM

Oh Lou Segal, there you go again with the anecdotal “evidence”.

You’re married to a teacher (in a private school—how long ago in public school? Is that experience even relevant today?) so that makes you highly knowledgeable about public schools and their problems. And of course there are problems there—nobody is saying there aren’t.

As far as teachers sending their kids to private school: I’m sure there are some that do, as you claim (based on a few examples, probably—such compelling evidence, as usual!). I know many teachers whose kids go to public schools. If I know a greater number than you do, do I win in the anecdotal evidence contest? Lou, Lou, Lou, when will you ever learn?

» lou segal on 06.07.12 @ 12:10 PM

Alex, well at least you’re willing to admit we have problems in our public schools. I guess where we differ is that you think more money is the answer and I think fundamental reform is necessary. Unfortunately, the educational bureaucracy, much of the Democratic Party and the teacher unions will fight to the death any serious reforms.

» Sy Prey on 06.08.12 @ 08:29 AM

The biggest challenge in education today is getting teachers unions off both sides of the bargaining table whether this is at the state legislature level or your local school boards.

Parcels taxes are just one more slush fund for teachers unions. Voters knew this and said no, just like they said no to the First Five tobacco tax slush fund for pre-schools who have shown no discernible proof of their long-term value.

Prove something works before demanding tax payers keep investing in it. This is a simple equation to follow. We have now harvested our lack of attention to this simple question with massive state debt, a state economy in the toilet and the most dysfunctional state legislature in history.

We get it. We goofed handing over so much money and so much power for so little in return. Public employee unions on both sides of the bargaining table did this to us and we did this to ourselves voting to let this happen. No more.

No more public employee unions on both sides of the bargaining table whether it is the White House, the state legislature, a city council or your local school boards. Whoever has the power to write checks on your tax dollars should never have their first loyalties to the public employee unions who campaigned to put them in office.

» Wireless on 06.08.12 @ 01:30 PM

This is a simple matter of priorities and looking at where the costs are. There is plenty of money available to do the things the city should be doing but the money is misallocated. Same in the state and county case. The fact of the matter is about 1/3rd or so of the budget in the city goes to pay people who no longer work for the city. In a few years that will be 1/2. That won’t work. Until the pension cost issues are dealt with we are wasting our time.

Continuing to ask taxpayers to bear the burden of the city’s inability and unwillingness to confront the 800 pound gorilla is unfair and irresponsible. Look at what just happened in Wisconsin, they were in very bad shape and it was fixed relatively easily by addressing some union cost issues. The same sort of things would work here if they had the guts to confront the unions.

» Alex Quinn on 06.09.12 @ 06:59 AM

No Lou: I believe fundamental reform AND more money are necessary. In fact, any substantive reform will require more money as schools are already struggling to fund current mandates. We’d probably disagree over the types of reforms needed but schools can’t handle any more top-down, poorly designed unfunded mandates like No Child Left Behind. Anyone concerned about money wasted in schools should look at that ridiculous set of rules, and the resources required to follow them. And numerous studies demonstrate these problems with NCLB “reforms.” So yes, careful, well thought out, educator designed reforms are needed, AND money is needed to implement.

And I am not against Unions but do believe the tenure system needs major overhaul so it’s easier to boot bad teachers.

FYI Wireless: City government and school districts are completely separate entities, with different funding, internal governance, and goals. Your points make no sense.

» lou segal on 06.09.12 @ 09:50 AM

Okay, Alex, I am glad to see that you’re in favor of fundamental reform, but the unions, most of the Democratic Party in the pocket of the unions, and the educational bureaucracy are all fighting to the death any serious reforms, such as tenure and seniority, which is why I and many other people are so fed up. After too many years waiting for this to happen, I have come to the conclusion that the only way to persuade these selfish constituencies to agree to any reform is to deprive them of any more money. I don’t believe additional money without the reforms will do much good.

To tell you the the truth, the unions will never give up and allow any changes to the archaic tenure and seniority rules, so I have become an advocate for school choice. Issue a $13,000 voucher to every kid and let their parents choose which school to send their children to. This way we eliminate all the spending for unnecessary bureaucracy and empower parents to choose the best schools for their children. I would bet you any amount of money that enterprising entrepreneurs from Stanford, Harvard and other great colleges would be starting up great schools with innovative curriculums and enthusiastic teachers. I can’t think of a better way to encourage good performance than to have a school that is doing a poor job lose enrollment and go out of business. There is nothing like losing your livelihood to provide the discipline and motivation to strive for excellence. Our govt-monopoly schools have lost sight of what their mission should be and have become rule-bound, bureaucratic institutions, which have become sinecures for teachers and administrators. Our children deserve much better than this.

You probably won’t agree with much of what I am saying here, so how about we agree to these parcel taxes only if the unions agree to amend their collective bargaining agreements to eliminate tenure and allow school principals to fire ineffective teachers. You said yourself that fundamental reform and more money are necessary. So let’s not do one without the other. I bet you if the teacher unions were presented with a referendum of this type, they would undoubtedly reject the money.

» Wireless on 06.09.12 @ 07:23 PM

The total amount of money brought in by our local and state governments all comes from the same taxpayer pot. How they prioritize things that they should focus on, like public safety and education and infrastructure, is what is at issue here. When we have 30% of the tax revenue coming in to various local governments that goes out to pay retired workers that is 30% less available for current services like schools. How it is accounted for is immaterial to the fundamental problem we have. That is the point.

The other point is that this load is projected to increase to 50% in the not too distant future. When half of the tax revenue is going to pay people who no longer work, current services will, by definition, suffer significantly. In San Jose they finally reached the breaking point, something like 75% of their tax revenues were going to pay retirees. Until this issues of public pensions is addressed we will not have the resources to properly fund the core responsibilities of state and local government. It is that simple.

Continuing to try and milk a dry cow and trying to extract more money from taxpayers is irresponsible and doesn’t address the core problem. These politicians, at all levels, need to grow a pair and start addressing the core issue here. Wisconsin had some pretty significant issues that were fairly easily fixed by addressing a key cost driver. The same thing can be done here if we didn’t have a bunch of politicians who are bought, paid for and owned by the public sector unions. It’s disgusting frankly.

Raising taxes will not solve this problem. Getting rid of Prop 13 will not solve our problems. You think Real Estate sucks now, wait until you see what happens when Prop 13 goes away.

» Sy Prey on 06.10.12 @ 09:56 AM

The core problem is voters keep putting union candidates into office where they continue to do damage.

Stop blaming politicians. Get back to grass roots and attack voter ignorance that puts those politicians in office. The real battle line is between union political campaigning for their cronies and voter ignorance about what their vote can mean.

» Wireless on 06.11.12 @ 03:32 PM

Sy,

Stop blaming the politicians? Aren’t they the ones who awarded all these goodies to the public sector unions? Who are we supposed to blame?

It is the corrupt arrangement of the unions using their compulsory dues to elect compliant Democrat politicians who they then negotiate with for benefits and pay. The unions are essentially sitting on both sides of the bargaining table and nobody is looking out for the taxpayer. This is why collective bargaining needs to end.

The problem is addressed when you have politicians with some balls, like Gov. Scott Walker, who will attack the root cause. Unfortunately in CA we don’t seem to have any of those.

» lou segal on 06.11.12 @ 04:22 PM

“The unions are essentially sitting on both sides of the bargaining table and nobody is looking out for the taxpayer.”

This is legalized bribery. If a private citizen paid a politician to grant him a favorable govt contact, that person would be going to a federal penitentiary for 25 years.

» noleta res on 06.11.12 @ 10:09 PM

Wow you guys keep on spinning that conspiracy yarn!
Unions don’t negotiate with politicians.
They negotiate with employers, and it’s hardball.

» Wireless on 06.11.12 @ 10:35 PM

noleta,
We aren’t talking about private sector unions. We are talking about public sector unions like Teachers, Firefighters, Police, Prison Guards, AFCME, SEIU, etc. Pay attention if you are going to contribute. Public sector unions do indeed negotiate with the political class, that’s where the money comes from. That is how budgets are funded. It is shocking to me that anyone is this clueless in this day and age. Where do you get your news? Are you a product of the CA public school system?

Public sector employees are paid through tax dollars. Tax dollars are distributed by politicians. Good grief. I hope you don’t vote, if you are this clueless you really shouldn’t.

And the rest of you wonder why CA is imploding.

» Alex Quinn on 06.16.12 @ 09:21 AM

Apparently all that you people can talk about here is unions, unions, unions. It’s tiresome, inaccurate, and unproductive. You seem to focus on that one issue because it takes you off the hook: it’s a complex and distant problem you don’t have to get in there and fix—but boy can you complain about it, ad nauseum!!

Guess what, students and schools deal with all kinds of challenges that aren’t related to unions. These are things you could actually get involved in helping to improve…that is, IF you really care about immediate solutions rather than just complaining constantly about your own pet issues. Try getting off your butt, putting aside your unfounded opinions, and DO SOMETHING.

1. Santa Barbara County Officials Discuss Local Effects of Federal Health-Care Law - 05.23.2013 9:52 p.m.
2. With Renewed Vision, SBCC Graduate Robert Gutierrez Sees Bright Future - 05.23.2013 8:53 p.m.
3. Pacific Western Bank Opens Full-Service Branch in Downtown Santa Barbara - 05.23.2013 8:46 p.m.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Your Daily Noozhawk, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Facebook

Twitter

+ View More

School Parcel Taxes Fall Short of Two-Thirds Majority Needed for Approval

Log in

Daily Noozhawk

Facebook

Twitter