Is new parcel tax too low or just right?

District says its fighting for its 'heart and soul'

by Alexandria Rocha

School officials are prepared to fight for what they call the local district's "heart and soul" -- highly qualified teachers, small classes and eclectic course offerings -- by going for another parcel tax measure just slightly cheaper than November's defeated proposal.

The school board unanimously voted Tuesday night to head to voters in June with an annual $493 per year parcel tax measure with a term of six years. The June 7 special election will cost the district between $375,000 and $485,000.

The district's current parcel tax, which generates $5.5 million annually and fully funds the class-size reduction program, is set to expire in 2006. With the new measure, which would bring in $9.3 million a year, the district would maintain its small-class sizes, plus restore some programs and staff cut over the last two years of budget reductions.

"This is what the heart and soul of this district is," said board member Cathy Kroymann.

If the new measure takes after its predecessor and fails, nothing would be restored and the student-to-teacher ratio would increase.

Specifically, the small class program costs the district $6.9 million per year. Because of it, there are only 20 students in all kindergarten through sixth-grade classes, 20 students in ninth-grade English courses, and 24 students in seventh- and eighth-grade English and math -- as well as 10th-grade English.

"As a former Girl Scout leader, that makes a difference. When you have five girls, or 17 girls, you just can't do the same things," said board member Camille Townsend.

A $493 per year parcel tax would also pay for two high school deans, two counselors at the secondary schools, and one part-time psychologist and two librarians at the elementary schools.

In addition, about 34 high school and 20 middle school elective periods would be restored. For example, at Paly, AP physics and German were cut but could be offered in the future if the measure is approved. At Gunn, it could be the junior American-English history class or a second section of biotechnology.

The district has been known for its commitment to offering a slew of electives, even if only a small group of students is interested in the subject. Over the past few years, because of budget cuts, the district has not been able to offer those highly-selective classes.

If the district wins the election, it would be up to the individual middle and high school sites how to use those extra periods, depending on what students are interested in.

The district also hopes to restore $200,000 toward its primary school spectra art program, $50,000 in districtwide staff training and its $25 per student funding for instructional materials, all which was cut because of the shaky state budget, sliding property taxes and increased enrollment.

"You can go one year without staff development, but when you go two, three, four years, it starts to erode your program," Kroymann said.

In the district's first attempt last November, Measure I asked voters to increase the amount and longevity of a current parcel tax from $293 per year to $521. It failed by less than 1 percent. The measure needed two-thirds approval to pass as required by state law for all parcel taxes.

Although some members of the public said a proposal only $28 less than November's defeated measure was risky business, board members said going any lower would be detrimental to the district's programs.

"I think you're taking some risks with the $493. It's too close to $521," said Claud Ezran, a parent of a Jordan Middle School student, to the board at Tuesday's meeting. "I prefer somewhere between $450 and $473. If you can lower it by $20 or so, please try to do it. It will enhance your chances of winning."

A survey of 400 Palo Alto voters last month also revealed little support for a $493 per year parcel tax. In a memo to Superintendent Mary Frances Callan, the district's new business manager, Jerry Matranga, wrote there wouldn't be any greater community support unless the measure dropped to $450 or below.

However, board members stood by the higher amount in the end.

"Our curriculum and education needs the $493 level. It supports our educational mission," said board member Gail Price.

In 2001, the district passed its first parcel tax -- $293 per parcel for five years -- which more than 70 percent of voters approved. It has generated about $5.5 million annually, funding the district's current class-size reduction program and helping to pay for an 8.5 percent raise for teachers in 2001 and a 2 percent raise in 2002.

That same year, property taxes hit an all-time high of 13 percent. With revenue soaring, district officials spent their time beefing up curricula, hiring specialized teachers, and adding advanced and remedial courses.

But in 2003-'04, property taxes plummeted to less than 1 percent growth, and the district's $120-per student basic-aid funding was slashed because of the state budget crisis.

Since then, the district's teachers and support staff haven't seen a raise. As a property tax-funded district, Palo Alto schools don't receive any extra money for increased enrollment.

Since then, the district has cut $6.5 million from its budget, slashing staff and programs and using $3.4 million in reserves to avoid additional layoffs.

The district's answer to such a shrinking budget is to pass a parcel tax. If voters turn down the measure in June, the district will have one more chance in November.