Peninsula voters asked to toss school levies’ time limit

The strong academic performance of Palos Verdes Peninsula schools is often cited as a reason newcomers buy expensive homes on The Hill, and residents have for years been generous in support of the school district.

Now, faced with continuing cuts to Sacramento’s education budget, the district is asking homeowners on Nov. 8 to open their wallets indefinitely in support of a $374 annual parcel tax with no expiration date and an adjustment for inflation.

The tax, which provides an exemption for senior citizens, amounts to the exact same dollar figure that property owners are paying now for two parcel taxes – at $165 and $209 per year – that are set to expire in 2013. The funds can only be used for district educational programs, not for facilities or construction.

But the fact that Measure M includes no sunset date has generated more pushback for a district that has asked voters to fund three construction bond measures and three parcel tax measures since 2000.

There’s no organized opposition – and no ballot measure argument against it was submitted – but handmade signs opposing Measure M have been spotted on the Peninsula.

“This is a hard sell. But because it becomes a no sunset, the district can rely on this money,” said Julie Trell, a Palos Verdes Estates mother of two and co-chairwoman of the pro-M campaign, Keep Our PVP Schools Strong.

The measure comes as the school district has been in the spotlight in recent months

for a lawsuit over land use in Palos Verdes Estates, a contentious battle over parent-proposed football stadium lighting at Peninsula High, and criticism from neighbors over new bleachers installed at Palos Verdes High.
But district officials feel confident because voters have been so supportive in the past.

The measure needs approval from at least two-thirds of voters. A 2009 parcel tax measure – one of the two that will expire in 2013 – garnered a fairly close 68.9 percent of the vote.

The two existing parcel taxes bring in about $7 million for district operations each year, a big chunk of the Palos Verdes Unified School District’s $90million general fund budget, Deputy Superintendent Pearl Iizuka said.

“If we were to lose that portion of that funding, we’re talking devastating cuts,” Iizuka said.

Without that $7 million, the district forecasts layoffs for 90 teachers and 40 support staffers, plus cuts to athletic programs, counseling, academic intervention initiatives, library and technical employees. Class sizes would increase as well.

Those cuts would come on top of a loss of $25 million in state funding since 2008-09 – money that’s owed to the district.

The precarious state budget situation is yet another reason that the district wants a reliable source of local revenue, Measure M supporters said.

When cuts began three years ago, the district had the equivalent of about 629 full-time teachers, counselors, nurses and psychologists. Today, that figure is 565, while the district serves about the same number of students – nearly 12,000.

And though it covers an affluent area, the 15-campus district is considered a “poor” education agency because it receives less money per pupil than many other nearby districts because of an arcane state funding formula.

Still, with a generous education foundation that recently pledged to raise $2.7 million for the district this year, Palos Verdes Peninsula schools haven’t seen truly deep cuts found in other districts.

Andrea Sala, executive director of the Peninsula Education Foundation, said the nonprofit has witnessed increasing belt-tightening among area residents, but parents have continued to give.

“Schools are very important in this community, whether you’re living in an apartment and you’re a single parent or you’re in a $10 million home. … Most of the people who moved here – whether they’re 35 or 85 – moved here because of the schools,” Sala said.

However, voters, she said, are more “leery” about Measure M than in the past because of the lack of a sunset date.

At a City Council candidate forum in Rancho Palos Verdes last week, most of the contenders expressed alarm about the issue, though none specifically said they outright opposed Measure M. (School board President Dora de la Rosa is among those running for a Rancho Palos Verdes council seat, and she has enthusiastically backed it.)

Trell said she explains to voters that the school board can move to stop levying the tax at any time in the future. And voters can choose to place an initiative on the ballot to overturn the parcel tax if they decide it’s unfair. That could be passed by a simple majority vote.

“The misconception that people have is that no sunset means it’s permanent. That’s not the case,” Trell said.

As for concerns about the tax’s built-in inflation adjustment based on the consumer price index, Trell notes that the board has to hold a public hearing and vote each year on whether to make that adjustment – typically a small percentage.

Iizuka, for her part, said it’s hard to foresee a future when the district won’t rely on money from the parcel tax.

“If we look at history as to how the state is, maybe there will be a time when we’re able to be made whole again. At that time, maybe we can evaluate the parcel tax,” Iizuka said.