Due to technical difficulties some of the links on the Piedmont Civic Association website are not operating properly. Until the problems are corrected, please send OPINIONS, INFORMATION, and ARTICLES to www.editors@piedmontcivic. org.
We apologize for any inconvenience and if we have missed any submittals, be assured our goal is to receive and publish information in a timely manner.
Thank you,
PCA Editors
Resident explains reasons to vote No on School Support Tax
The PUSD Board is a body of elected members who are ultimately responsible for the activities, results, and fiscal strength of Piedmont’s schools. They have proposed in Measure A, that a so-called “independent” subcommittee (The Parcel Tax Advisory Subcommittee) of the Budget Advisory Committee (BAC) be formed to review the School Support Tax uses, and to recommend the subsequent year’s levy. The Subcommittee members would be chosen from BAC members and approved by the President and Vice President of the Board. To me, this doesn’t look like an independent review of the PUSD’s operations and finances. It looks like a situation in which the Subcommittee members, who were approved by the Board, might feel obliged to agree with and endorse the Board’s predilections.
Why is a truly independent review important? Piedmont ranks third highest of the State’s top 10 Academic Performance Indicator scores. Yet, the proposed tax ($2,406) is more than twice that of top-rated San Marino ($1,169), while all of the other top 10 districts’ tax rates are under $700. Is Piedmont’s school district being managed efficiently? It takes a truly independent review to determine this.
We recently suffered a similar situation with our City Council. They presided over a multi-million dollar public works fiasco which might have been prevented had there been some kind of independent oversight of the project. Let us learn from that disaster and build into Measure A, and future taxes, a more robust review and oversight mechanism.
I want Piedmont’s schools to be top-ranked, and I am willing to pay taxes to achieve this. But I need to know that our tax money is being used as efficiently and effectively as possible. It would behoove our School Board to secure a truly independent review and oversight of activities and finances for which they are responsible.
Proponents for Measure A argue that voting “No” will damage our schools. In fact, the current school tax doesn’t expire until the end of June, 2014. A better tax measure could go on the ballot in June 2013, or November 2013, or March 2014. We don’t need to approve the deeply flawed Measure A at this time.
Another flaw in the current Measure A is its unequal taxation. With a single tax amount per parcel, irrespective of the parcel’s size, this tax charges small parcel owners as much as 40 to 80 times more per square foot than large parcel owners. A fair and uniform tax would levy the same amount per square foot. The Board’s advisors think that the recent Borikas v Alameda Unified School Board decision by the Court of Appeals restricts a uniform size-based tax. Others disagree. On January 7, 2013, the Court of Appeals agreed to rehear the appeal of the trial court decision, thereby, the previous decision is now vacated. And, on the same day, Assembly member Rob Bonta of Oakland introduced AB 59, which clarifies the existing law. So remedies for a fair and uniform tax are on the way.
It would be unfair to lock in a tax that is higher for nearly 3,000 owners of smaller parcels while reducing the tax on approximately 800 of the largest parcels, compared with the current tax charge. There is adequate time to fix this inequity before Piedmont needs to approve another school tax.
Proponents of Measure A point out that Piedmont’s excellent schools raise our property values over similar homes in other cities. Indeed, if all properties enjoy the same percentage of increased value, the larger properties receive a much larger dollar amount of this benefit. Shouldn’t they pay a larger amount of the school tax? A uniform tax based on parcel size would be fair and equitable.
Let’s vote NO on A now, so that we can vote YES on a tax measure that assures efficient management and that taxes us equitably.
Bruce Joffe Piedmont resident, home owner, and concerned citizen.
Editors’ Note: The opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Piedmont Civic Association (PCA). PCA does not support or oppose ballot measures or candidates for public office.
This chart was prepared for the Piedmont Board of Education with analysis by Michael Brady, Assistant Superintendent.
On Monday February 11, 2013, the Planning Commission will hold a hearing on the initial draft outline of the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan application for a grant to fund it from the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC). The plan will identify projects, programs and policies that make walking and bicycling throughout the City safer, more pleasant and more convenient. The plan is expected to designate a network of bicycle routes; recommend high-priority sidewalk, intersection and other street improvements; and suggest policies and effective programs to promote walking and bicycling. The plan is also expected to include a “Safe Routes to School” component, with ideas to make it safer for kids to walk or bike to the City’s three elementary schools and one middle school. The community’s feedback is invited throughout the process, beginning with initial ideas of what should be included in the bicycle and pedestrian plan.
The hearing is the third item on the Commission’s agenda and will begin at approximately 7 pm. The public is invited to attend the hearing at City Hall Council Chambers, at 120 Vista Avenue. It will be broadcast on KCOM, cable 20 and streamed live on the internet.
To watch the meeting live or at a later time, log on to the City’s website at www.ci.piedmont.ca.us: on the right hand side of the homepage under the “City Council” heading, click on the “Online Video” link, then scroll down under the “Sections on this Page” heading, click on the “Planning Commission” link, then on the “February 11th meeting”, click on the “Video” link and watch.
Town Hall meeting on crime issues Tuesday, February 12, 2013 at 7:30 PM in the Veterans Memorial Building
Piedmont’s new Chief of Police, Rikki Goede and several officers will explain the steps the Police Department is taking to combat the increase of crime in our City. This meeting will be hosted by the City’s Public Safety Committee, the City Council, the City Administrator, and other City officials attending. There will be time allotted for residents to ask questions of Chief Goede.
Chief Goede’s served in the police departments of San Diego for 10 years and San Jose for 16 years, reaching the level of Assistant Chief. She has worked in virtually all areas of police activities, including patrol, field training, crime prevention, internal affairs, robbery, gang investigations, and a variety of command assignments.
At the February 4 City Council meeting, Piedmont’s new Police Chief, Rikki Goede, requested and received authorization for hiring up to four additional officers coordinated with “anticipated retirements and departures of existing police officers. ” Additional overtime will be a part of the Chief’s multi-pronged response to recent home invasions in Piedmont. New officers will begin their 4-6 month field training in March. The department is evaluating license plate readers and video surveillance services.
The Chief proposed the following:
Piedmont Town Hall meeting on crime issues Tuesday, February 12, 2013 at 7:30 p.m. in the Piedmont Veterans Memorial Building, next to City Hall. The public is invited to attend. There will be no broadcast available for the meeting.
The City will move forward on contracting with the Emergency Communications Network (ECN) – Code Red at a cost of approximately $6,320 per year to provide a multi-media emergency notification system that will supersede the City’s current E-Mail Alert Program. All residents will have the opportunity to join by providing their contact information directly to the Code Red database.
At the same time, the Piedmont Public Safety Committee will be clarifying its future role, duties and responsibilities and the City Council may expand its charge beyond providing a forum for residents to voice their public safety-related concerns and suggestions. (Read more: City Council Minutes January 22, 2013 – Report from the Chair of the Public Safety Committee; Correspondence was received from: Barry Barnes & Samantha Spielman; Charlotte & Michael Ero; Alan Kong; Piedmont Public Safety Committee Reports.)
The Piedmont Police Department has an active program for confidential tips to be submitted to the Police Department.
How did the Piedmont Unified School District Board determine the Measure A first year amount of $2,406 per parcel?
First, $9.5 million, stipulated by School Board members as the necessary funds, was the approximate amount of revenue generated by the current Measure B 2012-13 parcel tax and adding an additional 5% increase for 2013-14, which the School Board planned to levy for 2013-14. (December 11, 2012 PUSD minutes)
Second, the School Board divided the number of parcels (3,920) into approximately $9.5 million to determine the $2,406 tax per parcel tax proposed in Measure A. Below are the number of Piedmont parcels in each category as defined by the School District under the current Measure B tax, which is based on parcel size.
3,764 – Residential
11 – Commercial
39 – Multi-family
11 – Multiple parcel
95 – undeveloped
Total: 3,920
Under the proposed Measure A flat tax, approximately, 78 % of residential property owners will find their tax increased, while approximately 22 % will find their taxes reduced compared to current rates.
Total number of residential parcels = 3,764
993 – Parcels under 4,999 sq. ft. tax will increase
1,953 – Parcels between 5,000 sq. ft. and 9,999 sq. ft. tax will increase
818 – Parcels 10,000 sq. ft. or over tax will decrease
2,946 – Total residential parcels taxed more under Measure A
818 – Total residential parcels taxed less under Measure A
50 – Commercial/multi-family parcels taxed less under A
95 – Undeveloped parcels taxed more under Measure A
Multi-family and commercial parcels (50) will
be assessed significantly lower parcel taxes, since the owners will pay one flat tax of $2,406. (For example, owners of the several nine-unit rental apartment buildings in Piedmont will pay one flat tax instead of a PUSD tax on each unit.) Owners of undeveloped parcels (95) will experience a doubling of their tax from $1009 to the flat rate of $2,406 the first year with the potential 2% annual increase during the eight year period.
Below are the per parcel projected 8-year Measure A payments. These figures include a 2% increase per year for each parcel. By the end of the tax 8-year term the total for each parcel would amount to $20, 651.
2013 $2,406
2014 plus 2% $2,454
2015 plus 2% $2,503
2016 plus 2% $2,553
2017 plus 2% $2,604
2018 plus 2% $2,656
2019 plus 2% $2,710
2020 plus 2% $2,764
Potential Measure A total 8 year assessment per parcel
= $20,651
Additional tax rate information is available on the Patch.
The Alameda School Board replaced its flat school tax with a square foot tax, but its former tax is still in court –
In 2011, Alameda Unified School District replaced its challenged parcel tax (a flat tax for more than 90% of taxpayers and a square footage tax for a few large commercial property owners) with a square footage rate for all properties. Alameda’s Measure A has been in effect since July 1, 2011, replacing Measure H, which has been under legal challenge since 2008.*
The current Alameda Measure A subjects all buildings (whether commercial, industrial or residential) on developed parcels to an annual tax of $0.32 per square foot up to a maximum of $7,999 per parcel. (A 2,000 square foot house in Alameda is taxed at $640. The same house in Piedmont will be taxed $2,406 under the proposed Measure A.)
Exclusions are offered by the current Alameda school tax, both to single family residences owned and occupied by persons 65 or older (“senior exemption”) and by disabled recipients of SSI of any age (“disability exemption”). Parcels without buildings are taxed at a flat $299 per parcel rate. In March 2011, the new Measure A was approved by 68% of Alameda voters to replace the challenged Measure H.
* The former City of Alameda Measure H school tax was approved by voters in June 2008. It charged a flat rate of $120 to all single family residential properties and the vast majority of commercial parcels, while charging a few owners of large commercial or industrial parcels at the rate of $0.15 per square foot up to a maximum of $9,500 per year. The tax was promptly challenged in August 2008 by a large commercial property owner objecting to the assessment of tax per square foot on his commercial property while all residential and all smaller commercial properties were taxed at a flat rate of $120. The trial court upheld Measure H. The tax was recently struck down by the Appellate Court as failing to be a “uniform tax rate”.
The University of California Police department offers advice on reducing your chance of becoming a crime victim –
Be sure to write down the manufacturer, model and serial number of your computer or tablet and file this information. It is useful to law enforcement in their efforts to recover property.
Commercial software products are available which can track a computer’s location through its connections to the Internet. Install and activate the software when the laptop is in your control, and it will be useful if a theft occurs. Some computer models purchased from Dell, Lenovo, HP, and other manufacturers may have Absolute Software’s Computrace, which embeds a tracking agent in the BIOS. The tamper-resistant agent remains active even if the hard drive is reformatted or replaced. > Click to read more…
Measure A = $2,406 tax for 8 years = approximately $20,000 per parcel
On March 5, 2013, Piedmont voters will be asked to consider ballot Measure A to allow every parcel to be equally taxed $2,406 for 8 years to support the Piedmont schools. (To find the tax rate in the official documents, read to the end of the official materials and look under RATES.) If the tax plus the allowed 2% annual increase is levied every year during the 8 year term, the total for each property will be approximately $20,000 per parcel. The official ballot material states:
School District ballot language for Measure A
To prevent local school funding from expiring and to maintain the quality of Piedmont’s schools, to attract, train and retain qualified teachers, to protect programs in math, science and technology, to continue funding for music, visual and performing arts programs, and to keep textbooks and instructional technology up-to-date, shall the Piedmont Unified School District continue to levy a special tax as specified in the voter pamphlet, with all funds staying in Piedmont to benefit our schools?
Voters are to cast their vote either yes or no. > Click to read more…
Content on the PCA website by Piedmont Civic Association is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
Some icons are Copyright © Yusuke Kamiyamane
