In order to show support for local education, Redwood City elected officials and leaders are publicly embracing proposed by the , which is slated to go on the June ballot.
On Monday night, the City Council approved a resolution declaring the city's endorsement of Measure W, a proposed annual $67 tax to homeowners that would generate funds exclusively for use by the local elementary school district.
"Get behind this," said councilman John Seybert, who urged voters to approve the tax regardless of whether they have children currently enrolled as students in the district.
If approved, the tax stands to generate $1.7 million for K-8 schools in Redwood City over the course of the proposed five-year life span.
Last Wednesday the passed a similar measure that also encouraged local residents to pass the tax when it goes to voters on election day June 5.
"I strongly support the parcel tax and as a resident of Redwood City I will be voting in favor of the measure," said Sequoia Union High School District Superintendent James Lianides.
The Redwood City School District is responsible for generating 40 percent of the students currently enrolled in the high school district, said Lianides.
"The Board strongly supports their efforts to preserve valuable educational programs and instructional time," he said, referring to the high school district board of trustees pledging support for those in the elementary school district.
Local leaders are hoping that their public endorsement will persuade residents to show support for local education by opening their checkbooks. But history reflects Redwood City as a community that is reluctant to be so generous.
On three instances since 1990, voters have shot down similar parcel taxes proposed by the Redwood City School District.
But last year Redwood City voters approved , as well as , in order to stabilize the city's budget. This may be seen by local tax advocates as a beacon of hope for what is to come during the summer election.
In order to pass in the upcoming election, 67% of votes must be in favor of the tax.
According to councilwoman Barbara Pierce, the local school system should be viewed by the community as an asset because the quality of the school district has a significant impact on home values in Redwood City.
"It is critical for our families to feel proud of our schools," she said.
She also noted that the only school system feeding into the Sequoia Union High School District without a parcel tax currently is the Redwood City School District.
Proceeds from the parcel tax would allow district leadership to roll back on imposing further spending cuts. Over the course of the past five years, the Redwood City School District has laid off nearly 120 employees in order to shave $13 million from its budget, according to a district report.
And the local budget woes are worsened by the ongoing financial crisis taking place in the state legislature.
According to Seybert, voters should see the upcoming election as an opportunity to exercise local control by generating funds for public city schools that will remain in Redwood City.
"It is time to take funding back," he said. "Sacramento cannot be trusted with funding our education."
Then Mayor Jeff Ira explained that with this parcel tax revenue, money stays within the district and cannot be taken by the state.
"A dollar is a dollar," he said. "It stays right here in the district."
For more news about Redwood City and surrounding areas, including unincorporated San Mateo County, follow us on Twitter and "like" us on Facebook. Get Patched in daily by signing up for our newsletter.
If we had more charter schools with non-union teachers we could do away with the lottery and save money. Doesn't that sound like a win-win situation?
People trying to run this country with a "that's business" mind set is destroying our economy. Politics and business are 2 separate things. That is the first thing you must realize to have any success in politics. Public School Districts are not businesses.
I see this all the time working with start ups and young companies. The investors force the operation to run lean until it seems the future of the investment will go south quickly. Their choice is to walk away with a loss or double down with additional investment. That's what this ballot measure is all about: Do we want to see our children thrive, or do we just let chaos reign?
Can you elaborate on the loans? Why? When? How much? What shortfall? I thought the District had it under control with cutbacks and restoration of class sizes to historic levels. Why have campus closures, and facility leases to alternative education providers been excluded from the solution? Why not turn some of the campuses into more efficient, non-union charter schools? I disagree with your statement that "The constituents of RCSD have gotten more than what they put in...". What we put in is more than just property taxes. Those dollars that take a round trip (not free) to Sacramento and Washington with unfunded strings attached to their return trip are wreaking havoc with our return on investment. There are alternatives. Choice is the key element in any solution. No more money for the status quo.
Lou Covey Wrote: "They have a product (educated children) that is measured and regulated for quality." Viewing students as a product is very sick minded. They are people, not merchandise. I bet he would like them all tagged with an RFID chip or a barcode too because that is what the 1% wants because they see our children as products just like Lou.
Cross training works for businesses as well as School Districts. Single subject teachers should cost considerably less then those with multiple disciplines. Charter and private schools, not required to employ credentialed or unionized teachers, have considerably more flexibility which results in cost savings. Redwood City School District needs to think "outside the box" they are in. A Parcel Tax is not the solution.
It is very difficult to get a teaching degree in one subject, it takes a lot of time and dedication for one subject. Imagine how much time and money it would take for a college student to learn 2 or more subjects and get a teaching degree in each of those. That should not be required by anybody union or not it is disrespectful to the profession. This is like asking the electrician at a job site to lay down the floors also. He or she would not be able to dedicate enough time to each project when he/she is on a schedule. The jobs would not be done professionally and problems would happen. This is the same for teachers. Your child cannot get a good quality education unless they have a teacher specialized in one subject. This is why it is important to hire teachers who have made that subject their passion and in order to do this the district needs our help financially. Yes on W
So because they don't have to employ teachers with credentials pretty much legally anybody can teach at a charter school? That doesn't sound right, who would want their student learning from someone that only reads the subject out of a book but has no passion for it? Who would want their Math teacher to be the same teacher for History or English or Science? Just to save money charter schools are doing this. That sounds very corporate to me. It appears that charter schools main goal is to save money instead of providing our children with quality education by hiring teachers with credentials and a passion for the subject. If you hired a carpenter to run all your electrical in your house, you may get a house fire. If you hire one teacher to teach all of your student's subjects, you may get a drop out. More school funding means more passionate teachers YES on W!
Three times since 1993, the District warned of grave consequences if their Parcel Tax failed. Three times they failed, and the grave consequences failed to materialize. They didn't need parcel taxes then, and they don't need a Parcel Tax now. NO on W
If you receive separate tax bills for each lot (as I do) you will pay multiple parcel taxes.
Although you may have contiguous lots you Will Not face multiple parcel taxes because you can claim an exemption - be clear about that! Also I assume you are personally greatly benefiting from Proposition 13, which means the costs of servicing your properties is greatly subsidized by younger families in the community. You certainly have a right to your property tax savings but you need to recognize you are benefiting from others and you are trying to deny their children adequate education resources. Very self centered position. Also remember all of the districts surrounding RWC have passed parcel taxes (generally larger parcel taxes) - Palo Alto, East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Portola Valley, Woodside, San Carlos, Belmont/Redwood Shores.
An exemption is singular. Since I receive separate tax bills for each of my contiguous lots, I would need two exemptions. RCSD definition: “Parcel of Taxable Real Property” shall be defined as any unit of real property in the District that receives a separate tax bill for ad valorem property taxes from the County Tax Collector’s Office. They chose not to define it as Portola Valley did: "A parcel shall be defined as any unit of real property in the District which receives a separate tax bill for ad valorem property taxes from the San Mateo County tax collection officials, except that only one tax will be assessed to owners whose property include one or more contiguous parcels. Any property owner aged 65 years or older may qualify for an exemption from the special tax if that property owner occupies the parcel."
You certainly have a right to your opinion but you may want to do some research into the history of Prop 13. Here are a couple of links to start you off: http://tinyurl.com/Bay-CitizenJan2011 http://tinyurl.com/WikipediaMAR2012
Actually, all of my children already graduated from public school. I also benefit from Proposition 13, but I support the needs of public schools. I recognize the need to help each other in a community. I know there is a real need for this parcel tax - the state continues to take away money and that void needs to be filled.
I don't play the buddy system, I may agree with you on this one measure but I don't support corruption in any way. Weather somebody agrees with me or not. Many of your views are corrupted that you have posted on the Patch. Viewing our children in our community as products is wrong. If you don't feel that way than why didn't you apologize for the slip up. It does not matter how well your business is doing or how much profit you will make from your owned property "Jack" the district needs money to provide our children with a good education. Public school systems are closing down because of the rise in charter schools leaching off of public funds which were meant for public schools. Research all the schools in Oakland that were shut down because of lack of funding. Do you really want to see our schools Like Sequoia High which has been around since 1896 to shut down? The corporations do and that is why they back charter schools. Show the corps that our community cares vote YES for W!
Why are you attacking somebody's age and your statements are very confusing. Are you for Measure W or are you against it. Regardless if you still have children in school or not it should not effect your support public education. That would be a selfish and immoral decision to vote no just because you have gained no direct benefit from it. That is why "Jack" is voting no because he would gain no benefits from this and because he has multiple properties he would be taxed more. We all know that in this day in age if you own multiple properties when homes are being foreclosed on by the thousands, than you can afford to pay this tax on those properties and help our children with the resources they need. It really is a selfish motive "Jack!" Don't be selfish, vote YES on W!
Nice try, do yo really think I would give you my real name ha ha ha, maybe I'm a family member, maybe I'm your employer, maybe I work for you, maybe I'm your babysitter, maybe I'm a member of the council or maybe I am your own son or daughter. You see what you don't understand i"Barb" is that when you practice anonymity you don't open yourself up for personal attacks and discrimination against personal views and opinions.
I'm sorry I didn't realize this was an essay and that I had to proof read and make sure all my spelling is correct and that I must have proper punctuation. THIS IS A FORUM! in the real world and like any other forum SPELLING and GRAMMAR DONT MATTER! Why does it matter which demographic I come from? Maybe I was rasied in the hills and lived in a 20 million dollar home went to a private school and graduated from Stanford. Maybe I lived under a bridge and went to a public school and graduated from San Fracisco State.The point is it doesn't matter what demographic anybody comes from. If you really need an answer I will give you one. I COME FROM PEOPLE! People are my demographic, I am a person! Maybe you should stop to think about that before you start judging and placing people into categories based on their "demographic."