7,292 / 77.9% Yes votes ...... 2,074 / 22.1% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

In 1993, the voters in the Burlingame Elementary School District approved a special tax in an amount of $64 per year per parcel. In 1997, the voters extended the $64 tax and approved an additional special tax of $40 (for a total of $104 per parcel), both of which expire June 30, 2005. In 2003, the voters approved a special tax of $76 per parcel for 8 years commencing July 1, 2003 and expiring June 30, 2011. By this measure, the District's Board of Trustees propose to extend for six years, commencing July 1, 2005 and expiring June 30, 2011, the $104 per parcel special tax that is expiring on June 30, 2005.

A parcel shall be defined as any unit of land in the District which now receives a separate tax bill from San Mateo County. Any person 65 years of age or older who owns and occupies a parcel as a principal residence may qualify for an exemption from the special tax. All property which would otherwise be exempt from property taxes will also be exempt from imposition of this special tax.

The purposes of the special tax are to: maintain teachers, class sizes, support reading programs and libraries. The tax will not be used for administrative salaries.

The proceeds of the special tax will be placed into a special account.

The Board of Trustees must file an annual report accounting for the parcel tax revenues collected and the manner in which they have been spent.

This measure would also increase the District's appropriations limit per fiscal year, in an amount equal to the levy of the special tax for that year, as permitted by Article XIIIB, section 4 of the California Constitution.

A "yes" vote on this measure would allow an additional special tax to be levied on property within the boundaries of the Burlingame Elementary School District in an amount of up to $104 per year per taxable parcels in the District to be used to maintain teachers, class sizes, support reading programs and libraries. It would also allow the appropriations (spending) limit to be raised.

A "no" vote on this measure would not allow the additional $104 special tax to be levied and would not allow the appropriations limit to be raised.

This measure passes if two-thirds of those voting on the measure vote "yes."

pro

• supportburlingameschools.com

In 1993 and again in 1997, Burlingame voters agreed to provide local funds for local schools that cannot be taken away by the state. These funds have been used over the years to attract and retain good teachers, protect small class sizes and support critical programs.

The local education assessment that provides these funds will expire next year. Measure S will renew this critical source of funding which is needed to:

- Recruit good teachers and prevent teacher lay-offs in hard times;

- Preserve small class sizes;

- Support teaching the basics, including reading, writing and math, as well as enrichment programs like art and music; and

- Provide books and other classroom supplies.

Measure S also will help to strengthen local property values. In today's residential real estate market, great neighborhood schools typically mean higher home resale prices.

A volunteer citizen oversight committee will monitor all Measure S expenditures to ensure that the funds are spent wisely and used only for the purposes approved by the voters. No funds will be used for administrative salaries.

The measure will expire in six years, and cannot be renewed without voter approval. Residents 65 years of age and older are, and will continue to be, exempt if they so choose.

Measure S will preserve our excellent local schools and benefit the entire community. It does not increase the tax rate by a single penny. We hope you will join us in voting YES on Measure S.

/s/ Rosalie M. O'Mahony August 12, 2004

Mayor of Burlingame

/s/ Annette J. DeMaria August 11, 2004

Burlingame School District First Grade Teacher

/s/ Mark Lucchesi August 13, 2004

Store Manager, Mollie Stone's Market

/s/ Judy Meuschke August 6, 2004

Outstanding School Volunteer Award Winner

/s/ Robert G. Shaw August 11, 2004

Co-Chair, Burlingame School District Budget Advisory Committee

o A parcel tax is not an `investment'. It is extra money extorted from defenseless residents under threat of home foreclosure. Pretty words about "caring" and "community" don't change the hard, ugly truth.

o If this measure didn't raise taxes, it wouldn't be on the ballot. If the mugger who robbed you Monday robs you again Tuesday, is that not a new crime? Parcel tax proponents effectively say to victims: "Stop complaining. --It's just an extension of Monday's mugging."

o Parcel taxes do not "strengthen local property values". Burlingame's backers of higher taxation would like to take credit for the 88% growth in local property valuation over the past decade, but valuations doubled in the rest of the county, which does not generally share Burlingame's penchant for parcel taxes.

o Schools are the beneficiaries of high property values--not the cause. (High achieving parents bring high achieving students--and more taxes-- to the community.) Everything on the proponents' wish list can be secured with regular funding and thrift.

o This is not about stabilizing funding. To the degree state funding is variable, it will continue to be so, with or without Measure S. The parcel tax is just more money for the same people.

o Those who do wish to give more money to the school district don't need Measure S. Measure S is 100% about extorting money from those who disagree with city leaders and the school-centered special interest groups.

/s/ Christopher V.A. Schmidt August 19, 2004

Lincoln Elementary `72

/s/ John J. "Jack" Hickey August 19, 2004

Chair, Libertarian Party of San Mateo County

/s/ Harland Harrison August 19, 2004

Candidate for Congress

This "temporary" parcel tax was first adopted in 1993 as a $64 tax, to last only 6 years.

Four years later, the $490,000 in supplemental revenue was no longer necessary, and (logically) should have been repealed, because regular property tax revenue had increased by $1.6 million in the meantime. Instead, the District cried poormouth, and persuaded voters to increase the tax to $104, and extend it for 8 more years.

Only six years later, the $800,000 in supplemental revenue was even more obviously unnecessary, since property tax revenue was now $4.3 million higher than in 1993.

What about inflation? And population growth? In 1993, the District had $8.1 million in revenue. The dollar equivalent budget in 2003 would have been $9.9 million. A further adjustment, to reflect the slightly larger student population, yields a more comparable figure of $11 million.

Did the District need a parcel tax to obtain $11 million in revenue in 2003?
--No. By that time, revenues excluding the parcel tax had grown to $14 million. In other words, even without the parcel tax, the District's revenue grew 28% over and above the amount needed to account for inflation and student body growth.

Honorable stewards would have arranged to cease collection of the parcel tax long before 2003, but did they? No. Instead they trotted out the same old sorry song and dance in 2003 and passed an additional $76 parcel tax.

With today's measure, they seek to increase the parcel tax to $180 per year, or $1232 total (for both measures).

Enough Already!

It's time school officials learned a little fiscal discipline, and stopped asking for tax hikes all the time.

Please vote `no'. Thank you.

/s/ Christopher V.A. Schmidt August 12, 2004

Lincoln Elementary '72

/s/ John J. "Jack" Hickey August 13, 2004

Chair, Libertarian Party of San Mateo County

Measure S is not a new tax. It renews an existing tax that property owners are already paying. Measure S will prevent teacher layoffs, preserve small class sizes, support teaching the basics and help fund enrichment programs. Our opponents claim that rising property taxes directly benefit Burlingame schools - but this is false. Rising property taxes have no direct effect on Burlingame schools' revenue. The State of California allocates funds to schools based on a statewide funding formula, which has become more unpredictable in recent years. Burlingame schools receive only a fixed amount per student from the state. In fact, this amount is among the lowest for schools in San Mateo County. Burlingame school funding does not increase when local property taxes increase.

Measure S is different from property taxes. Measure S will generate local funds for our schools that cannot be taken by the state.

The Burlingame Elementary School District is an invaluable community asset. Our excellent schools provide a quality education for our children and contribute to high property values for everyone. Passing Measure S will simply maintain the status quo.

On November 2nd, protect the quality of our excellent local schools without raising taxes + Vote YES on Measure S.

/s/ Vic Mangini August 23, 2004

Retiree + Former Burlingame Mayor

/s/ Diane E. Condon Wirgler August 23, 2004 Burlingame Citizen of the Year

/s/ Ross Bruce August 23, 2004

Business Owner, AVR Realty, Inc

/s/ Marlys D. Loveall August 22, 2004

Longtime Burlingame School District Teacher

(a) providing local funding for our schools that cannot be taken away by the State of California and used for other purposes;

(b) attracting and retaining highly-qualified teachers and other employees;

(c) supporting class size reduction;

(d) supporting reading programs and libraries; and

(e) supporting the teaching of the basics, including writing and math?

An exemption will be granted for any parcel owned by one or more persons 65 years of age or older who occupies a parcel as a principal residence, following an application for exemption.

To provide additional accountability, a volunteer community budget advisory committee will be appointed by the Board of Trustees of the District to monitor all expenditures funded by this Measure to ensure that the funds are spent wisely and used only for the purposes approved by the voters. The budget advisory committee will report on an annual basis to the community on how these funds have been spent. In addition, none of the proceeds of the special tax will be used for administrative salaries.

A parcel is defined as a unit of land in the District which now receives a separate tax bill from the San Mateo County Assessor's Office. All property which would otherwise be exempt from property taxes also will be exempt from the special tax.