All four school parcel tax measures on the ballot in May 6 special elections were rejected by voters, preliminary election results indicate, despite school districts’ use of taxpayer-funded resources to encourage support for the measures.
In Contra Costa County, voters in the Acalanes Union High School District appear to have rejected Measure T, which had 62.2 percent of the vote in preliminary results, falling short of the two-thirds vote needed for passage. The county reported voter turnout of just 29 percent, but additional ballots postmarked on or before election day will increase this figure.
The ballot question was written by proponents to encourage a “yes” vote, asking voters: “Shall the measure supporting high quality education in local high schools by continuing advanced academic programs in math, science, engineering and art; attracting and retaining highly qualified teachers; preparing students for college and in-demand careers; and maintaining manageable class sizes, with Acalanes Union High School District levying a $130 parcel tax for eight years, with senior exemptions, annual inflation adjustments, independent oversight, providing $4,500,000 annually in local school funding that cannot be taken by the State, be adopted?”
Additionally, the school district’s website included a question-and-answer section with biased statements including: “I don’t have children who attend AUHSD; how does this impact me? Even if you do not have high-school-age children, good schools continue to help support the neighborhood’s quality of life and protect the value of local homes.”
The district also distributed a campaign-style “fact sheet” bearing the headline: “Measure T: Maintaining Academic Excellence & Keeping Top Teachers in Local High Schools,” accompanied by a photo of smiling students and a teacher in what appears to be a robotics lab. The document included sections titled “Local High Schools Among the Lowest Funded in California” and “Local Funding Sources Have Stagnated.”
In an all-mail election in Marin County, preliminary results indicate that voters rejected Measure E, a parcel tax placed on the ballot by the Ross Valley School District. The measure had 62.1 percent of the vote, failing to reach the two-thirds threshold, in an election with voter turnout of 35.2 percent.
This parcel tax in Measure E would be 52 cents per square foot of buildings, or a $95 flat rate on unimproved parcels.
The school district’s website included a “frequently asked questions” page with questions including: “Will the cost of the measure be distributed across the community? Yes. The measure is based on building square footage, meaning that single-family homeowners may pay significantly lower rates than large building owners. The cost of the parcel tax is based on the square footage of the building meaning the cost of the tax will be distributed across the community based on building size.”
Last year, when the district was planning to the put the measure on the ballot, officials sent a colorful campaign-style “informational mailer” to residents, with a classroom photo labeled “Success in the Classroom,” accompanied by a message that stated, “Ross Valley School District is planning for the future of your neighborhood schools.”
In Santa Clara County, voters in an all-mail election rejected Measure A, proposing a $72-per-year parcel tax for eight years to raise funds for the San Jose Unified School District. Preliminary results show the measure failing with 60.5 percent of the vote, with voter turnout of just 17.5 percent.
The district distributed a “fact sheet” with the headline: “Locally Controlled Parcel Tax Funding for Student Achievement.” The document and other district materials presented Measure A as a plan for “renewing local school funding at current tax rates,” with “current rates” underlined for emphasis.
In Calaveras County, voters in the Mark Twain Union Elementary School District rejected Measure A, a $65 annual parcel tax for four years. Preliminary results show the measure receiving 53.4 percent of the vote in the vote-by-mail election that had a 30 percent turnout. The tax was estimated to cost taxpayers approximately $600,000 per year.
The school district’s website includes a page with a photo of smiling members of a school basketball team next to a “fact sheet” that presented a very positive perspective on the tax, including a sentence, highlighted in bold, stating: “Funds must be spent on Mark Twain Union Elementary School District’s programs and cannot be taken by the state and spent elsewhere.”
Three other special elections were held May 6:
- In El Dorado County, voters rejected Measure A, proposing a tax increase to fund the Texas Hill Zone of Benefit. The ballot question was straightforward, asking: “Shall the measure to levy an annual special tax in an amount of $619.52 with annual adjustments tied to the Engineering New Record Construction Cost Index on each parcel of land within the Texas Hill Zone of Benefit commencing fiscal year 2025/2026 and continuing for an unlimited duration, to be used only for road improvements and maintenance and street lighting services and generating an annual revenue of approximately $67,527.68, be adopted?” The measure needed a two-thirds vote for passage and had 62.7 percent, according to preliminary results. Turnout for the all-mail election was 50 percent.
- In Modoc County, voters rejected two taxes proposed to fund the California Pines Community Service District. Measure M, which would increase the annual parcel tax rate from $66 to $116, costing taxpayers an estimated $98,000 per year, received 46.5 percent of the vote, while Measure N, tripling another district parcel tax from $25 to $75, costing taxpayers an estimated $755,000 per year, received 48.8 percent. Measure M would fund roads, water, and sewers, while Measure N would fund fire services. The voter turnout was 36.2 percent.
- In Tulare County, a landowner election was held to determine whether a consolidated water district should be formed. With a turnout of 32 percent, Measure R appeared certain to pass, with 89 percent support in the preliminary results.
The next special election for a tax measure is scheduled for June 3, when voters in the San Marino Unified School District, in Los Angeles County, will decide the fate of Measure R, proposing a parcel tax of $415 per parcel for six years, cumulatively costing property owners an estimated $1.6 million per year.
Measure R follows the same template as the other school districts’ tax measures, with a ballot question that begins: “In order to continue funding quality educational programs and classroom instruction, prevent class size increases and teaching position reductions, attract and retain high quality teachers and employees, and support educational programs that enhance student achievement, shall San Marino Unified School District extend its expiring school parcel tax … .”
In addition to including a seemingly obligatory photo of smiling students in a classroom with its Measure R information, the school district’s website poses and answers these questions: “Would Measure R increase taxes? No. Measure R renewal would be initially set at its current rate ($415 per parcel per year commencing fiscal year 2025-26), subject to annual adjustment for inflation, for a term of six years. Has SMUSD been a good steward of past voter-approved funding? Yes. SMUSD is required by law to prepare and make available an annual report on how its parcel tax funds are accounted for and expended in accordance with their intended purposes.”
The Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) is authorized to investigate allegations of illegal use of tax dollars to advocate for or oppose ballot measures, and can impose financial penalties for violations.
Indeed, the agenda for the FPPC’s May 15 meeting includes a consent item to approve a $31,500 fine against Cathedral City for sending “informational mailers” to residents presenting a one-sided perspective of Measure B, a successful 2021 ballot measure that placed restrictions on properties used by owners as short-term vacation rentals.
The FPPC found that the Cathedral City mailer used “inflammatory and overly argumentative language” and a “focus on alarming incidents” associated with short-term vacation rentals “without offering a balanced view or alternative perspectives.” The mailer “unambiguously urged support for local Measure B” and “the timing of the mailers also suggests a campaign-like intent, aimed at influencing voters’ decisions within the critical pre-election period,” the FPPC added.