Editorial: Alameda school tax would raise total to nearly $2,000 a year

Click here for a complete list of our election recommendations.

Voters in the city of Alameda deserve to know how much they already must pay for exceptionally hefty supplemental school taxes before being asked to approve another one that would drive the average homeowner’s cost to nearly $2,000 a year.

Measure B on the June 7 ballot asks voters to approve a tax that would enable the district to issue $298 million in bonds for school construction. Bonds are a form of borrowing money like a mortgage; the tax would cover the annual payments.

The new tax would be on top of two school bonds that property owners are still paying off and two parcel taxes for school district operations. One of the parcel taxes, which alone costs homeowners an average $447 a year, was struck down by a Superior Court judge on April 5. But the school district is appealing.

Property owners deserve to know what their total supplemental bill would be. The school district already has pushed the boundaries of what is reasonable. Until the current litigation is resolved, the district should not be seeking a fifth tax. Voters should reject Measure B.

All told, the average homeowner is potentially on the hook for up to about $1,620 annually for the four existing supplemental school taxes, including the one currently under legal appeal. Measure B would drive up the total cost to a peak of $1,940, based on today’s property values, and extend the payments on school bonds another 16 years, until 2058.

That would be an exceptionally high bill, surpassed in the East Bay only by districts in some of the wealthiest communities. Here’s how the Alameda taxes break down:

• Measure B1, approved by voters in 2016, is a parcel tax for district operations, set at 32 cents per square foot of building area, with a cap of $7,999 a year. The average single-family home in the city is about 1,687 square feet, making the average tax under Measure B1 about $540 a year.

• Measure A, approved by voters in 2020, is the other parcel tax, set at 26.5 cents per square foot, also with the same $7,999 cap. For the average size building that works out to $447 a year.

Measure A is the tax currently tied up in court. It’s also the measure that school officials deceitfully passed off on voters without telling them it was solely funding to partially cover 9% salary increases for almost every district employee.

• Measure C (2004) and Measure I (2014) were bond measures for school construction. For those, property owners are still on the hook for about $375 million in payments over the next 20 years. The supplemental tax bills to cover that are expected to peak in about 10 years at about $93 for every $100,000 of assessed value. At today’s average assessed value for a single-family house of $680,960, that works out to $633 annually.

• Measure B on the upcoming ballot would increase that bond debt, increase the tax payments and stretch out the payments through 2058. The total payments for the three bond measures would then peak in 2035 at about $140 per $100,000 of assessed value or, at today’s average assessed value, about $953 annually for the average house.

For many homeowners, the Measure B increase would be easier to swallow if they weren’t also facing the $447 parcel tax that’s tied up in court. The district ought to abandon that tax before asking voters to fork over even more money.

The legal fight over the Measure A parcel tax is especially galling because it’s the fourth parcel tax since 2008 that has faced a costly court challenge because the district refuses to structure its parcel tax measures as most districts do — as a flat fee for every parcel or a square-footage rate that applies to all buildings. Instead, they keep trying to impose parcel taxes with two-tier structures that run afoul of state requirements of equitable treatment for all property owners.

The district also keeps skirting the law by using tens of thousands of dollars of public money to essentially campaign for ballot measures with so-called “informational” mailers that walk right up the legal line of advocacy, look almost identical to typical political propaganda and skip over crucial details.

It’s time for Alameda school officials to respect the financial limits of residents, stop using taxpayer money to deceive voters and follow the letter of the law. Until they do, voters should reject more tax hikes, starting with voting no on Measure B.