San Ramon Valley Unified School District Parcel Tax Renewal, Measure A (May 2015)
Measure info |
---|
Bond elections |
2018 • 2017 • 2016 • 2015 2014 • 2013 • 2012 • 2011 2010 • 2009 • 2008 All years and states |
Property tax elections |
2018 • 2017 • 2016 • 2015 2014 • 2013 • 2012 • 2011 2010 • 2009 • 2008 All years and states |
See also |
State comparisons How voting works Approval rates |
A parcel tax renewal measure was on the ballot for San Ramon Valley Unified School District voters in Contra Costa County, California, on May 5, 2015. It was approved.
Measure A authorized the district to renew for nine years its expiring parcel tax of $144 per parcel per year. According to the president of the school board, this tax had generated about $7 million per year in revenue for the school district. The school district served 33,814 students in the 2013-2014 academic year.[1]
A phone survey commissioned by district officials in July 2014 indicated that the renewal of the $144 parcel tax was likely, but by no means certain, to pass. Of the 600 interviewed, 73 percent of respondents said they would support such a measure, amounting to just over six percentage points higher than the required two-thirds (66.67%) vote. When asked about increasing the parcel tax, however, only 64 percent of respondents were supportive -- just over two percentage points lower than the supermajority requirement.[2]
The race over Measure A features an organized support campaign and the lack of any organized opposition or any political action committees filed to oppose the tax renewal.
This ballot measure election, which was approved by all five school board members, was an all-mail election, with ballots mailed to the district's 80,646 eligible voters in early April and due back on May 5, 2015.[1][2]
A two-thirds (66.67%) vote was required for the approval of this measure.
Election results
San Ramon Valley USD, Measure A | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
![]() | 19,618 | 74.98% | ||
No | 6,548 | 25.02% |
- Election results from Contra Costa County Elections
Turnout
As of April 22, 2015, about 21 percent of voters had returned their ballots.[2]
On April 22, 2015, Assistant County Registrar Scott Konopasek said, "It's a pretty good turnout. But it's kind of like a two-hump camel. We get a whole lot of ballot returns and a lot of interest up front. And then I expect it to flatten out over the next couple of weeks, and then by mid-to-late next week, I expect the number of ballots to go up again."[2]
The complete count of the ballots on election night showed 23,755 electors, out of the 80,646 registered voters, cast a ballot on Measure A for a turnout of 29.46 percent.[3]
Text of measure
Ballot question
The following question appeared on the ballot:[4]
“ |
Without increasing the current tax rate, to support academic excellence, retain qualified and experienced teachers, and prepare students for 21st century college and careers with strong reading, writing, math and science education, shall San Ramon Valley Unified School District renew its expiring education tax at $144 per parcel for 9 years, with citizen oversight, annual audits, no funds for administrative salaries, an available exemption for persons 65 and older, and all funds spent to support local schools?[5] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis of Measure A was provided by the office of the county counsel:[6]
“ |
The Board of Education of the San Ramon Valley Unified School District ("Board of Education") has adopted a resolution proposing to re- new a parcel tax (a qualified special tax). This ballot measure asks voters to decide whether a parcel tax should be imposed on parcels within the District beginning July 1, 2016. District voters previously approved the parcel tax in 2004, and renewed it in 2009. The parcel tax is set to expire on June 30, 2016, according to the District. If this measure passes, a parcel tax of $144 per year would be levied on each parcel of taxable real property within the District beginning July 1, 2016 and expiring on June 30, 2025. A parcel of taxable real property is any unit of real property located in the District that receives a separate property tax bill from the Contra Costa County Treasurer-Tax Collector's Office. The parcel tax would not be levied on parcels that are exempt from paying property taxes. The measure also provides that any person whose property serves as his or her principal residence and who is 65 years of age or older, or any person who receives Supplemental Security Income for a disability, may apply to the District to be exempt from payment of the tax. The ballot measure states that the proceeds from the parcel tax will be used to fund "(a) core academic programs in reading, writing, math and science; (b) Advanced Placement (AP) courses and other programs...; (c) ongoing teacher training and development to attract and retain teachers; and (d) career and technical training courses." Proceeds from the parcel tax may be used only for the specific purposes set forth in the ballot measure and according to constitutional and statutory provisions. State law requires the District's chief fiscal officer to file an annual report with the Board of Education that states the amount of funds re-ceived and expended in each year and the status of any projects required or authorized to be funded with parcel tax proceeds. State law also re- quires the proceeds from the parcel tax to be deposited into a designated account. The measure requires the Board of Education to establish a Citizens' Oversight Committee, to ensure that proceeds for the parcel tax are spent for the purposes set forth in the ballot measure. Two-thirds of those voting on the ballot measure must approve the measure for it to pass. A "yes" vote is a vote in favor of authorizing the parcel tax. A "no" vote is a vote against authorizing the parcel tax.[5] |
” |
—Contra Costa County Counsel[6] |
Resolution
The full text of the resolution calling for this election is available here.
Full text
The full text of the tax measure is available here.
Support
San Ramon Valley USD Superintendent Mary Shelton, reacting to members of the community that showed up at the school board meeting concerning this measure, said, “I’m very pleased to see so many community representatives here tonight to encourage the Board to move forward with placing this measure on the ballot. Our community has really come together to support our schools.”[7]
Supporters
A campaign called Keep SRVUSD Schools Strong / Yes on A was started to support the passage of Measure A.[8]
The following individuals signed the official argument in support of Measure A:[6]
- Marilyn Cachola Lucey, parent and executive vice president of the San Ramon Valley Council of PTAs
- Elaine Betts, chairman of the San Ramon Chamber of Commerce
- Andy Li, president of the Tri-Valley Chapter of the Asian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs Association (APAPA TVC)
- Ann Katzburg, teacher
- Don Ritchey, retired retail executive and former mayor of Danville
The Democratic Party of Contra Costa County voted to endorse a "yes" vote on Measure A as well.[9]
Other officials and organizations that supported Measure A include:[9]
- San Ramon Chamber of Commerce
- San Ramon Valley Council of PTAs
- San Ramon Valley Education Association
- San Ramon Valley Education Foundation
- All Trustees of the SRVUSD Board
- All Danville Town Council Members
- All San Ramon City Council Members
- Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (D-14)
- County Superintendent Karen Sakata
- County Supervisor Candace Andersen
- Danville Mayor Mike Doyle
- San Ramon Mayor Bill Clarkson
- Steve Mick, Alamo Municipal Advisory Council
For a full list of Measure A endorsements see the Yes on A website.[8]
Arguments in favor
Denise Jennison, San Ramon USD Board of Education president, said, “We believe that our schools do an excellent job of providing a top quality education for our children and community support for our students is one major reason we are so successful. This existing, voter-approved local education funding is a reliable source of revenue that the District can count on every year, and is crucial to stabilizing our district’s budget. It generates about $7 million annually, allowing us to maintain strong academic programs and retain our great teachers.”[7]
Official arguments
The following was submitted as the official argument in favor of Measure A:[6]
“ |
Vote Yes on A to safeguard quality teachers and educational programs in our local San Ramon, Danville, Alamo and Dougherty Valley schools, without increasing taxes by a single penny. Our community's excellent schools make our neighborhoods desirable places to live. By keeping our schools strong, we keep our community strong and protect property values for all, whether or not we have children in school. Since 2004, our San Ramon Valley Unified School District has relied upon crucial, voter-approved, local funding to strengthen and maintain core academic programs, prepare students for college and careers and retain and attract quality teachers to support the success of all SRVUSD students. This funding is due to expire next school year. Measure A continues existing, local funding that directly benefits our SRVUSD schools and cannot be taken away by the state. Measure A provides stable, locally-controlled funding our schools can rely on every year, providing protection from the instability of the state budget situation, and keeping our schools on top. Vote Yes on A to protect academic excellence in our schools.
Measure A includes important fiscal safeguards and does not increase taxes.
Our schools provide an excellent education for our children, preparing them for success in today's competitive economy. Keep our schools strong--vote Yes on A.[5] |
” |
—Marilyn Cachola Lucey, Elaine Betts, Andy Li, Ann Katzburg and Don Ritchey[6] |
Opposition
Arguments against
Ray Greer, a Danville resident interviewed by the San Jose Mercury News, said he was inclined to reject Measure A. He said, "We're all for education, but if they waste money, I don't want to fund that. It's important to take a look at how the extra money is actually implemented. There could be a lot of wasted stupidity, and I'm not for that."[2]
A district voter expressed concern over a lack of solid information concerning how Measure A funds are spent. His comment on the pro-Measure A website asked, "Why doesn’t this site tell us how much of the previous funds were spent on giving teachers pay raises versus buying new books? The funds may be well spent, but you can’t prove it to me from the fluff on this site nor from the campaign mailers. Fluff won’t get my vote."[8]
No official arguments were submitted for inclusion on the ballot. If you have additional arguments you would like to see posted here, please email Ballotpedia.
Background
This tax was originally approved at a rate of $90 per year in 2004. District officials asked voters to increase the tax to $166 per year in June 2008, but voters rejected the measure. The increase to a parcel tax of $144 per year was authorized by voters in 2009 under the name Measure C, garnering approval from 72 percent of voters.[2]
School facts
The following data concerning San Ramon Valley Unified School District schools, students, faculty and staff is from the 2013-2014 academic year:[10]
Schools
- 35 schools in Alamo, Blackhawk, Danville, Diablo and San Ramon communities
- 21 elementary schools
- 8 middle schools
- 4 comprehensive high schools
- 1 continuation high school
- 1 independent study school
Students, faculty and staff
- Students: 33,814
- Employees: 4,136
- Number of Teachers: 1,414
- Number of Administrators: 80
- Number of Pupil Services Personnel: 87
- Number of Classified Staff: 1,155
The school district averaged about 24 students per teacher.
School budget
The table below displays the annual budgets for San Ramon Valley Unified School District from 2009 through 2013:[11]
Expenditures by Category | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
School Year | Staff Expenses | Student Services | Operational Expenses | Debt Service | Other | Budget Total | |||||||||||
Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | Total | % of Budget | ||||||||
2009-2010 | $185,585,429 | 85.1% | $9,869,096 | 4.5% | $20,759,107 | 9.5% | $0 | 0% | $1,888,986 | 0.9% | $218,102,618 | ||||||
2010-2011 | $185,292,473 | 85.9% | $8,944,628 | 4.1% | $19,458,795 | 9% | $0 | 0% | $2,105,443 | 1% | $215,801,340 | ||||||
2011-2012 | $196,922,918 | 85.2% | $10,656,999 | 4.6% | $20,161,602 | 8.7% | $0 | 0% | $3,299,507 | 1.4% | $231,041,026 | ||||||
2012-2013 | $209,264,379 | 86.6% | $9,512,500 | 3.9% | $19,508,201 | 8.1% | $0 | 0% | $3,244,011 | 1.3% | $241,529,091 | ||||||
Averages: | $194,266,299.75 | 86% | $9,745,805.75 | 4% | $19,971,926.25 | 9% | $0 | 0% | $2,634,486.75 | 1% | $226,618,518.75 |
Polls
The district commissioned a telephone poll of about 600 district residents in July 2014. The poll found enough support for a tax renewal to meet the two-thirds (66.67%) vote required for approval. Support for a tax increase, however, fell just under the required threshold. Here are the details:[2]
San Ramon Valley USD Tax Renewal | |||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poll | Support | Oppose | Margin of error | Sample size | |||||||||||||||
San Ramon Valley USD phone survey July 2014 | 73% | 26% | +/-Unknown | 600 | |||||||||||||||
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org. |
San Ramon Valley USD Tax Increase | |||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poll | Support | Oppose | Margin of error | Sample size | |||||||||||||||
San Ramon Valley USD phone survey July 2014 | 64% | 32% | +/-Unknown | 600 | |||||||||||||||
Note: The polls above may not reflect all polls that have been conducted in this race. Those displayed are a random sampling chosen by Ballotpedia staff. If you would like to nominate another poll for inclusion in the table, send an email to editor@ballotpedia.org. |
Related measures
San Ramon Valley Unified School District parcel tax, Measure C (May 2009)
San Ramon Valley Unified School District parcel tax, Measure D (June 2008)
See also
External links
- Contra Costa County Elections Office website
- San Ramon Valley Unified School District website
- Keep SRVUSD Schools Strong / Yes on A website and Facebook page
Additional reading
- San Ramon Patch, "Golden View 'Yes on A' Rally in San Ramon," April 21, 2015
- Danville SanRamon, "School board orders parcel tax renewal election," January 29, 2015
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Contra Costa Times, "San Ramon Valley School District seeks parcel tax renewal," January 29, 2015
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 San Jose Mercury News, "San Ramon Valley: Special election mail-in ballot asks voters to renew $144 annual parcel tax," April 24, 2015
- ↑ Contra Costa County Elections Office, "Unofficial Election results, Election Night Final," May 5, 2015
- ↑ Danville SanRamon, "School Board resolution calling for election," January 27, 2015
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 League of Women Voters of California Education Fund, "Renewal of Expiring Education Tax San Ramon Valley Unified School District," accessed April 1, 2015
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 San Ramon Patch, "San Ramon Valley Unified School District Board Votes to Renew Local Education Funding Measure on May Ballot," January 30, 2015
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 Keep SRVUSD Schools Strong / Yes on A, "Home," accessed April 28, 2015
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 Halfway To Concord, "Extension of San Ramon Measure A parcel tax for schools endorsed by County Democrats," March 24, 2015
- ↑ San Ramon Valley Unified School District, "Facts and Figures," accessed February 4, 2015
- ↑ Education Data Partnership, "San Ramon Valley Unified School District," accessed December 8, 2014
|