Comments In a perfect world Prop 13 could be repealed.
I agree that our schools are seriously underfunded. I do not think a parcel tax can ever be enough to make up for this. The burden needs to be on the State.California residents and businesses are one of the highest taxed in the nation. We certainly already pay enough in taxes. The distribution to our schools from these tax funds is just wrong. Every time a district passes a parcel tax this just puts an additional burden on the property owners that should already be covered by the state. Most of us just cannot afford more than $100 a year for this. With all of the things that our district lacks this just wouldn't be anything but a drop in the bucket. I also do not understand why the state money our school district receives is so much less per pupil than most of the other school district.
How come Cabrillo didn't get back the lost property tax revenue that La Honda/Pescadero gets from MROSD for the land they buy? Small change, but still something.
Two thousand messages from now you will discover the only district-wide infusion of money possible in the form of a tax is something called a parcel tax. Been tried, and tried, and tried, and tried, and tried. Not easy to get the people in the CUSD to vote a burden of this sort on themselves. In difficult economic times it might be impossible. Prop 13 has survived a lot of attacks. It is a terrible law as written, but those who don't like it never come up with proposals that include the essential tax relief and clamp on irresponsible government it provides without the obviously unfair aspects. People see government wasting money all over the place and are not inclined to pay more taxes, even if the areas in which money is being wasted are unconnected with the areas where more money is legitimately needed.
Interesting statistics on Great Schools.net. The average per pupil spending: California as a whole- $7,127; La Honda-Pescadero- $9,307; Palo Alto Unified- $11,170; and Cabrillo at the bottom with $6,903. We do not even meet the state average. This represents monies received from federal and state funding. I know this is based on a lot of formulas, etc. but I can never understand why there can be a discrepancy so great (i.e. Palo Alto and Cabrillo) between public schools in the same state. This does not take into account ed funds, PTA, etc. Our district gets almost no money and there is no way a parcel tax can make up for this. Perhaps someone on the school board can explain what is happening and what the district can do to change the formula.
I think the topic heading is incorrest. Property taxes do not fall short. They are high enough. The state legislature with their "pet projects" funding falls short. It's a sad story when the prison population receives more than the kids.
How much of our property taxes are being taken by the State and county and never returned to the coastside. We simply lack the political clout to ensure our property taxes are spent where they are earned. I wonder if we consolidated the whole coastside into a single city if we wouldn't have more leverage to ensure we keep more of our tax dollars to fully fund our schools.
The lack of funding is a shame. Our district faces challenges other parts of San Mateo county don't have. We have a large percentage of students who are still learning english. This requires our teachers to spend a significant percentage of their time helping these kids. These means the entire class is slowed down while they catch up. We should be getting extra dollars to help the teachers address this instead of receiving less in funding than other districts within the county.
With the economy slowing down I don't know why anyone would suggest higher taxes. We don't even have kids so why should we have to pay!
Schools don't deserve another penny in taxes until the teachers' union control over eductation is ended.
According to some graphs available from the state, it looks like we are spending more per student now, in inflation adjusted dollars, than we did before prop 13. If so, why is it believed that the quality of education is lower now than then? If the quality is lower now than it was then AND we spend more money now than then, why will more money solve the problem? Or, better, what is the problem?
The reason why Palo Alto gets more money is because Palo Alto (as many penninsula towns) are Basic Aid districts with a higher % of money going into the school budget, from the municipalities they are in.. More reading on this can be found under Educational Basic Aid Districts.
Why can't we be a Basic Aid District?
Because Cabrillo decided many, many years ago that Basic Aid wasn't such a great deal at the time. They chose another option which in the long run, obviously, is garbage.
I have to believe the school board has looked into why we can't change to a basic aid district. Our communities contribute a lot or property tax which is obviously being sent to other school districts while ours is under funded. Can't anyone do something about this?
Here's a map--sorta out of date--that will show you where our tax base for property taxes has gone: The green areas on the map are now larger, too.
Your map only shows the coastal region, not how our property taxes are being spent.
Did I say it showed how our property taxes were being spend???? I don't think so. It doesn't intend to but it does show (in green) SOME of the property that property taxes aren't being collected on.
Once again, an open discussion on School Funding issues and hardly a mention of the WASTE in school administation. Did you all know the administration caosts eat up 45-55% of school funds? Is this what you all agree to? With this largees at the top why do you think raising more taxes will do anything? I would love to see some new law, some new approach, to reduction of administrative costs and waste.
Hey, RJ, still down there on your knees? Here's one for you: why should property, especially public property, that does not provide students to the schools be taxed to pay for the schools? Or are you one of those incompetent welfare rednecks who needs public subsidies to support his mindless decisions to reproduce? Another and another: do you have any clue how property tax money is processed by the state and allotted back to the schools (by one of two major methods)? Do you have any clue how the processing of property tax money through the state has caused funding problems for other kinds of local districts, not just schools, throughout California as the state lays claims to the tax money to help with state-level budgetary messes? Have you calculated how little difference it would make to the California conundrum to tax undeveloped properties on which very little government money is being spent at any level? Didn't think so. Consider yourself a member of the knee-jerk anti-environment idiots on parade.
Now pitching, the intent of my blog was simply to raise the issue of school under funding. I believe our teachers hold some of the most important jobs in our community. I simply think we need to find ways to fully fund education. We live in a very affluent area which generates substantial revenues. For whatever reason, that does not translate into appropriate school funding. According to Education Week, California ranks 46th in the nation spending $7,081 per pupil. This is well below the national average of $8,973 per pupil. Cabrillo at $6,900 is not even at the state average. As the fifth largest economy in the world I think we can and should do better. However the solution will not come from the State. We already face to many budget issues, the result of years of over hiring and poor management. To solve this will require our community to come together and generate more revenue. This combined with fiscal discipline to make sure our dollars are working hard can make a real difference. I believe a modest parcel tax is appropriate and called for. If you have children you will benefit. If you own property (developed or not) you will also benefit from better schools which drive higher real estate prices. This problem is not going away and needs to be addressed.
"I believe a modest parcel tax is appropriate and called for. If you have children you will benefit. If you own property (developed or not) you will also benefit from better schools which drive higher real estate prices." This is what some other people believe as well. But it has failed what...five times in recent years? It takes a lot of effort to try to push through a parcel tax, and some locals in favor of such a thing may be tuckered out. In some instances the notion that real estate prices will go higher with more money spent on schools may not apply. In the first place, not everyone is convinced weak schools are what they are because too little overall is being spent. Some believe existing money is being spent unwisely. In wealthier communities where potential buyers are much less likely to have children or children in public schools, the status of schools may be relatively moot in buying decisions.
A lot of opposition to increased funding for schools is a statement to the way they are run. Take the case of this 7 year old kid in Oakland who keeps getting beat up at school. Nothing is done. God forbid that the teachers at that school volunteer to supervise the kids after school for 15-20 minutes until they are picked up. Not in the contract. How about if the individual teachers address bullying to their kids? Too much to ask. Not in the contract. Our own school district cannot seem to find the money to provide busing to kids who live miles away from school. The last parcel tax was not even for that, but for teacher benefits. Don't even get started on that whole Wavecrest fiasco. Yet the same people keep getting reelected to the school board. Go figure. The people who keep promoting these parcel taxes suddenly lose interest when their own children no longer attend the local schools.The property taxes we pay now are already in the stratosphere.
A "modest parcel tax" would do nothing to fix the schools. We already pay and pay. The community cannot fix this problem. It needs to be fixed at the state and federal level. I have children in the schools. There has never been a parcel tax proposed for anything that would directly benefit my children. Paying to bus other kids doesn't do anything for me.
To clarify, the school district is paying to bus the Moonridge children to Farallone view elementary school. Why they don't save the money and let them attend the Half Moon Bay elementary school is beyond me.
Here is an explanation of Basic Aid districts: I don't think Basic Aid Distric is something CUSD can choose to be. CUSD is (and I presume has always been) a "revenue limit district" which means it generates a certain amount of property taxes and then the state kicks in until we reach our "revenue limit" for school funding. In a "Basic Aid district" , like Palo Alto or San Mateo Union High School district, the property taxes are MORE (sometimes much more, especially a few years ago when real estate was at the top) than its "revenue limit" and therefore the state doesn't have to kick in any more. These districts have higher per pupil spending but actually receive little or no state money. It's towns like Hillsborough and Atherton that make some districts Basic Aid--for example, SMUHSD (which draws from the property taxes of San Bruno to San Mateo, including extra-pricy Hillsborough and Burlingame) is Basic Aid, but San Mateo-Foster City Elementary is not. There are only 60-80 Basic Aid Districts out of 1000 CA school districts. Seems odd that CUSD still end up lower than the CA average per pupil spending, but districts in Marin, the Peninsula, and wealthier So. Cal towns must really bring that average up.
Me, me, me, me, me.
I was bemused by the comment that the poster wouldn't pay for school busing because presumably her kids live close enough to walk to school or else she has enough free time to ferry them back and forth every day. With this thinking we could say, "Well my kid doesn't play music. So I am not funding any music program. Or my kid doesn't take algebra so I'm not paying for that either. I am just going to pay the teachers' salaries of the classes my children take!" See where I'm going with this?
No Catlady you missed the point. I do work and I do get my kids to school. We worked out a carpool. My point is that very few districts now have busing because of necessities. Busing is certainly not a "right" in a public school. Let's spend any money that we have on things like music, etc. but not on busing. If you have children then you have an obligation to get them to school, to the doctor, etc. wherever children need to be. I do not consider busing a necessity and I don't think a lot of others do either since we are so lacking. It is tough for me to get my kids there but I manage. Don't always think the worst of people!
At least those that have the ability, money, time, flexibility and social network to get their kids to school. Many others don't. Its not always about me, me, me, me, me, me.
Cabrillo Unified School District (CUSD) receives a large portion of your property tax dollar already. But it isn't enough. In Montara / Moss Beach, CUSD receives 37.78% of your property tax - out of the 1% limit set by Proposition 13 that governs the overall property tax amount. So if you live in a million-dollar home, your property tax is $10,000 and CUSD gets $3,778 out of that. That's about the spending on half a child in school. The average single-family residence in the Montara / Moss Beach area has an assessed valuation more like $400,000 to $500,000, not a million. So the average home is contributing enough in property taxes to pay for the education of about one quarter of a child. In addition, the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) has diverted some additional property tax money for the benefit of CUSD, at a significant cost to your fire protection district, sanitary district, water district, other special districts, and San Mateo County. You are paying more for fire protection through a "benefit assessment", more for sewer service, more for water, and getting less services from the County (like parks) because of this ERAF diversion. Houses - at least houses with children in school - do not generate enough property tax revenue to pay for the education of those children. CUSD has some commercial and industrial properties, which generate property taxes but not children. However, the General Plans for both Half Moon Bay and the San Mateo County Midcoast anticipate more residential development and little commercial or industrial development. The problem only gets worse as more houses are built. Ironically, houses are sold fairly frequently and then reassessed at market value, thus raising the property taxes they generate. But the big beneficiaries of Proposition 13 are the commercial and industrial properties that are rarely sold, and thus retain their 1978 assessed valuation (plus at most a 2% annual increase). Homeowners, whom Proposition 13 was purported to protect, are gradually taking on a larger proportion of the property tax burden in most communities. Similarly, the income tax burden on individuals has gone up while that on corporations has gone down, so the educational aid from the State of California and Federal government is also being shifted more onto ordinary workers. Meanwhile, California businesses complain that they can't hire qualified employees because the schools are so bad. So they need to import workers from outside the U.S. Wouldn't it make more sense to repeal Proposition 13, protect the homeowner from escalating property taxes by allowing increases in property taxes resulting from market value increases to be due on sale (out of the huge windfall the property owner receives, often largely tax-free, from the run-up in home values), and keep businesses on a level playing field with new entrants? California could return to the days when it was the envy of the entire country for its great educational system, including the state universities.
Still missing the point on the busing issue. Let the Moonridge kids go to school in HMB. There is no need to spend tax revenue busing them to Farallone. I would also like to hear some day the legal justification for busing for some and not for others. Very few kids live close enough to Farallone to walk. What about all of the Moss Beach parents? Why can't the bus stop on the way to school and pick them up? I think we all know the reason.
He's baaaaaaaack.....
There's probably no legal justification or a "right" for a child to sit at a desk either, but that is provided. I come from one of the rust belt states where there is not a lot of tax money to go around, but somehow those folks recognize the importance of providing a school bus to a child who lives 6+ miles away from the school. My kids went to Farallone when there was busing. How is a kindergartner supposed to walk from Moss Beach to Montara? Along the highway or the back way, along Sunshine Valley Road? Either way there are no sidewalks. This "no bus" situation has been going on for too long and until it's resolved I will not vote for any parcel taxes until serving the kids is the priority.
It won't be until you've lived in your house a few years and see what the house next door to you sold for that you will thank your lucky stars for prop 13. Before prop 13 people were forced to sell their own homes because every time a house in the neighborhood changed hands, everybody elses' taxes skyrocketed. If you buy a house at today's prices then you obviously can afford the taxes or you wouldn't be there. I do agree that businesses should pay more, maybe a percentage of their revenue, since residences don't generate revenue.
Catlady, a resident of Moss Beach, You described exactly the problem that Proposition 13 was "sold" as fixing. The result is the chaos we have today. Yes, if you had bought your home for $250,000 and were paying taxes (lets say $2,500), and the house next door sold for $500,000 (and was comparable), you'd get reassessed to the market level and your taxes would double. Proposition 13 took the property tax revenue away from the schools, but left you with the $250,000 capital gain when you sold that house (and Bush gave it to you tax-free). My suggestion above is that your actual tax bill would double, but if the new tax was a hardship for you, you'd only have to pay the same $2,500 as before - the other $2,500 could become a lien on the property, and would be collected out of the $250,000 windfall profit when you sell the house. Necessary government functions would still be financed (schools, police, fire), you'd still get most of the (unearned) benefit from the run-up in home values, and everyone - including the schools - would be better off. Even the big investment banking firms could get a piece of the action, by packaging up these tax liens into collateralized debt obligations and selling them off to bondholders, so the local schools could get their necessary tax revenue when they need it.
Many seniors are counting on their home equity to retire on, not to hand it over to the government when they are retired to move to a more affordable locale than here. We are not young enough to earn it over again. Since when is the government entitled to even drop they can suck out of us? There are enough turnovers of the housing market to finance the schools if they budget it wisely, such as every household has to figure out. How much money was wasted on Wavecrest?
It looks like most people agree our schools are under funded. The question remains, what to do about it. When I posted this, I thought perhaps folks might have some new ideas on how to close the funding gap. After reading everyone's comments here is my assessment: 1. We simply need to make sure we spend our tax dollars wisely and we can always do a better job with this 2. Repealing Proposition 13 is not a viable short-term option and is not widely supported by a great number of voters 3. Our community remains committed to education but split on whether a special property tax assessment should be enacted by the voters Now all of that said, the one fact we cannot escape is our school funding level remains below the National, State and County levels. This has a real impact on our ability to maintain smaller class sizes, attract the best teachers and maintain our schools. So I now ask folks, what are your specific ideas to close the revenue gap? Please vote or suggest your ideas: 1. Special Property Tax Assessment with some type of exemption for our seniors and low income residents 2. Additional Community Fund Raising (Think of something like the pumpkin festival with all the proceeds going to schools) 3. Can we enact a special sales tax? 4. Other Ideas Clearly we have a lot of very smart people in our community. Please share your suggestions on how we might fix this problem. Thanks, Grant
|
