State ed chief backs flat $50 property tax to fund public schools
By: PHILIP K. IRELAND - Staff Writer | ∞
CARMEL VALLEY ---- The state Department of Education is working to place an initiative for a $50 parcel tax on the November ballot as a way to pump an additional $500 million a year into public school education, State Superintendent of Schools Jack O'Connell said Monday.
The tax ---- an annual assessment of $50 on every property in California ---- could generate an additional $500 million that would be earmarked specifically for California schools, O'Connell told Solana Beach principals, district administrators and school board trustees before touring the high-tech campus serving 500 fifth and sixth-graders in Carmel Valley.
Under the initiative, known as the Classroom Learning and Accountability Act, disabled people and senior citizens over 65 years of age would be exempt, O'Connell emphasized.
EdVoice, described by its leaders as an organization of reform-minded philanthropists who support greater student achievement through investment, is backing the measure, said EdVoice president Christopher Cabaldon.
The Sacramento-based advocacy organization began collecting the necessary 600,000 signatures last week, said Cabaldon, adding that it plans to collect 1 million signatures to make sure the measure qualifies. Proponents have 150 days to gather the signatures.
EdVoice grew out of the passage of Proposition 39, which lowered the percentage of votes required for passage of a general obligation bond from 66 percent to 55 percent, making it easier to pass local bonds. Many of the same proponents pushing this proposed initiative backed Prop. 39.
If passed, the constitutional initiative could generate more than $500 million annually, with slight revenue growth each year as parcels get divided, Cabaldon said.
The tax would be "regressive," O'Connell said, meaning it would apply equally to the richest and poorest California property owners ---- from the simple San Ysidro trailer park land owner to the tony Malibu mansion owner. Both private and corporate landowners would be subject to the tax.
The parcel tax would allow school districts to use the money for three major purposes; smaller class sizes ($225 million), textbook purchases ($100 million) and school safety ($100 million), according to the initiative filed with the state attorney general's office.
Noting that the state's school modernization fund is exhausted, O'Connell said about $90 million of the parcel tax would be available for school construction and modernization. However, he said, only school districts that have not passed a school construction bond would qualify for the money.
And $20 million would be allocated to help pay for a data collection system at the state level as a new student tracking program develops over the next few years. The system would help track individual students and allow the state to better judge the effectiveness of school and student performance.
The act also would require audits of school districts to ensure that the money is being spent on sanctioned programs and materials.
O'Connell conceded that the measure is "not without controversy."
An initial poll indicated soft support for the initiative, with 50 percent of voters in favor, and 42 percent opposed, O'Connell said, adding that a later poll showed 56 percent support.
Should the measure be approved, O'Connell said he envisioned increasing the tax every four years by an additional $50, which he said would start "getting into serious money" for California's 6 million schoolchildren in more than 1,000 school districts.
O'Connell vowed that the parcel tax proceeds would add to ---- not replace ---- existing school funding streams.
The legislature would be prohibited from siphoning money away or attaching onerous "red tape" requirements to school districts seeking the funds, Cabaldon said.
Unlike the myriad rules imposed by the legislature to obtain current state "Class-size Reduction" funds, the parcel tax fund would allow freedom to school districts to reduce classes to any size at any grade level, Cabaldon said. Obtaining the funds would be a relatively simple application similar to a block grant, he said.
The announcement came Monday as O'Connell prepared for a tour of Solana Pacific Elementary School in Carmel Valley. O'Connell addressed 18 district administrators and school board trustees, informing them about several upcoming educational issues under consideration at the state department of education.
O'Connell came to Solana Pacific at the request of Leslie Fausset, Solana Beach School District's new superintendent.
Contact staff writer Philip K. Ireland at (760) 901-4043 or pireland@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
James wrote on Mar 7, 2006 5:49 AM:When will it ever end. More money more money, and they keep on failing,and the kids cannot pass the exit exam. I think it's timeto start cutting the funding!
Lawson wrote on Mar 7, 2006 6:01 AM:The problem with schools is not a shortage of money. The problem with schools is that Sacramento siphons off the money before it reaches the schools. Let the money flow to the schools where it is supposed to go, and everything will be fine. We don't need another property tax increase.
Suspicious reader wrote on Mar 7, 2006 7:24 AM:So who is paying for this tax increase? Aren’t we being tax to death? We just passed a Prop O bond for VUSD’s, “modular” facilities and that my friends was a joke! Oh, lets not forget Tri-City Hospital wants to tax us with 500 Million bond so that the CEO can reach his million dollar a year pension fund.
Frank wrote on Mar 7, 2006 7:41 AM:I agree with James. Look at your tax bill a large part of it is for schools. We are paying way too much now for schools. I believe it is time to reduce the amount ot money spent on schools! Schools are suppose to be a place where one learns reading, writing and arithmetic. In todays schools the children learn everything but the basics. Get back to basics and forget about more and more dollars!
Look at Temecula.... wrote on Mar 7, 2006 8:01 AM:The school board at the TVUSD just put their superintendent on paid administrative leave for four months. $80 grand for not working and they want more of our money!! Most people will say go ahead because it is for our children. NOT!!
Ron wrote on Mar 7, 2006 9:11 AM:This madness will end when we realize this is us, against them. Vote them all out. Put aside your political leanings, hold your nose, and get the clowns out!!! Arnold had it right the first time when he said Sacramento has a spending addiction. Now, he has it. All current office holders only option is to get more money. That is the way they think. You can't reason with them, you must get rid of them, and start fresh. And when that clown gets the idea he needs more money, you get rid of him too. WE do this until they get the idea were not going to hand over anymore of "our" hard earned money. Moochers... every one of them.
For once Ron.... wrote on Mar 7, 2006 11:17 AM:I agree with you. But that includes the politicians in Temecula as well!!
Surprise wrote on Mar 7, 2006 12:27 PM:What a shock. A tax and spend liberal wants to raise our taxes again, to flush even more money down the drain at our failed schools. And another big surprise, he has endorsed another tax and spend liberal, Francine Busby, for Congress. I guess that way they can tag-team us with tax hikes at the state and federal level.
Manjula Subbiah wrote on Mar 7, 2006 1:37 PM:THIS IS TRUE MARXISM!
FD wrote on Mar 7, 2006 6:00 PM:Nope - don't even bother putting that initiative in front of me. I won't vote for it. The waste of taxpayers money has to stop. O'Connell, go find some other sucker, this one isn't buying your BS.
John wrote on Mar 7, 2006 6:02 PM:I have a better idea, Mr. O'Connell. Since you and your staff have nothing better to do than sit around and figure out ways to tax the people more, why don't we just cut your budget by $500 million and give it directly to the schools. You obviously haven't found anything worthwhile to spend it on.
And Take Busby too... wrote on Mar 7, 2006 6:51 PM:Francine should be on the phone asking O'Connell to take back his endorsement if she knows what's good for her. This tax increase proposal is going over like a lead balloon in North County. So much for her being "moderate" when it comes to our tax dollars...
Marlene wrote on Mar 7, 2006 10:09 PM:Maybe if the initiative said that all those who had children in schools would be taxed the $50 -- not the property owner, the initiative would not pass! I am sick of my property taxes exploding every year -- I don't have children in school!
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement
Videos
Advertisement