Burlingame Elementary Schools parcel tax, Measure B (March 2010)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
A Burlingame Elementary School District parcel tax, Measure B ballot question was on the March 2, 2010 ballot for voters in the Burlingame Elementary School District in San Mateo County, where it was approved.[1]

The Burlingame Elementary School District already had two parcel tax measures in place.

Measure B asked voters to:

  • Combine the $76/annual Measure A tax, approved in 2003, with the $104/annual Measure S tax, approved in 2004.[2]
  • Extend the tax to 2021. The Measure A and S taxes were both set to expire in 2011. Under the terms of Measure B, the combined tax began in 2011, and will last for ten years.[3]

The district's parcel tax brings in about $1.4 million/year.

A group called the "Committee to Protect Great Burlingame Schools" supported the parcel tax.

The election was a mail-in ballot election.[4]

Election results

Measure B
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Yes 4,685 71.2%
No1,89928.8%
These final, certified, results are from the San Mateo County elections office.

Support

Logo of the "Yes on B" campaign

The official ballot argument in favor of Measure B was signed by Annette DeMaria, Tim Auran, Carol Yosuda-Terranes, John Root and Rona Blevins.

Their argument said:

  • "Burlingame School District provides an exceptional education for the local students in our neighborhoods. Over half of the district’s schools have been recognized as “Distinguished Schools” by the state. Due to top-notch teachers and strong academic programs, local students continue to excel year after year achieving top scores on statewide exams."
  • "That is why voting Yes on Measure B is so important — it will continue our local tradition of academic excellence and student success by renewing local education funding that is due to expire next school year."
  • "Every penny of these funds goes directly to our neighborhood schools and cannot be taken away by the state."
  • Voting Yes on Measure B will:
  • Maintain math and science programs
  • Support art and music programs in our schools
  • Protect school library services
  • Maintain small class sizes in first through third grades
  • Protect funding for books, classroom supplies and instructional materials
  • Attract and retain qualified teachers
  • Measure B is fiscally sound:
  • It will not increase taxes by a single penny
  • All funds go directly to Burlingame schools and cannot be taken away by the state
  • No funds can be used for administrators’ salaries
  • A senior citizen exemption is available
  • Measure B expires in 10 years and cannot be renewed without voter approval
  • Citizen oversight and annual audits ensure funds will be used wisely
  • As the state continues to be an unreliable partner in education funding, our Burlingame schools need Measure B more than ever to protect the keys to student success — strong academic programs, small class sizes and great teachers.

Opposition

The official ballot argument against Measure A was signed by Harland Harrison and John J. "Jack" Hickey.

Their argument said:

  • Government’s appetite for higher taxes and still higher spending never ends.
  • Consider all the taxes we pay, most of them at record highs:
• Property Taxes (plus special assessments)
• School Bond Taxes (districts, county)
• Sales Taxes (county and state)
• Income Taxes (state and federal)
• Vehicle License fees & taxes
• Gas taxes (state and federal)
• Telecommunications taxes
• additional excise taxes on alcohol, tobacco, gasoline, tires, etc.
  • If high taxes encouraged balanced budgets and responsible spending, California would be the best-run state in the nation! But the opposite is true—
  • Record revenue engendered bloated payrolls and unsustainable benefits schemes; outstripping our ability to pay for them. No amount of revenue can prevent politicians from spending more money than they take in.
  • The state government’s school districts are out-of-control: consuming almost half of the state budget, and borrowing recklessly, to spend even more. And, on top of all that, they have the gall to ask for higher parcel taxes too?
  • We couldn’t stop Sacramento from raising sales and income taxes last year, —but we can finally put an end to one long-standing “temporary” parcel tax. Now is our opportunity.
  • Please vote ‘NO’. This superfluous surtax is just plain greedy.

See also

External links

References