Town Square

Post a New Topic

Parcel tax costs - up to $300K for taxpayers

Original post made by John, Another Pleasanton neighborhood, on Apr 2, 2009

The following was posted under another topic and bears repeating. In addition to costs provided by the Registrar of Voters, PUSD has been working with Lew Edwards Group (PUSD is listed as a client on Lew Edwards Group's website)so in addition to the up to $300K for the actual ballot measure, consultant fees may also be paid for by PUSD with the taxpayers' money.

Since the parcel tax discussion began, I've heard different accounts of what the actual cost to put a parcel tax measure on a ballot would be. Initially PUSD estimated the cost to be $100k-$150K, a cost they hoped/expected would be covered via private sources.

The cost is now estimated to be $5-$7 per voter and according to a quote by Dr. Casey in the March 13 Pleasanton Weekly, that would mean $200K-$230K and "the money would be taken out of the reserves from the current school year."

According to the Alameda Registrar of Voters, the final cost could run up to $300k.

Had Measure G been placed on the statewide ballot of May 19th, the state would have picked up certain expenses such as ballot printing and costs associated with processing votes by mail. This would have decreased the costs to PUSD by 20-30%.

If Measure G had been set up as a mail only ballot (rather than by poll), the cost would have been less, but the Registrar couldn't estimate how much less it would be.

San Ramon Valley Unified School District is using a mail only ballot process for their upcoming parcel tax measure, and according to their website, estimate savings of up to $200K for the school district by using this option.

It's not possible to determine whether PUSD would have equivalent savings. San Ramon's school district covers a wider geographical area, may have more polls and consequently poll workers. All that can be said is that a mail only ballot would be less expensive than requiring voting be done at polls.

PUSD had contacted the Registrar of voters to discuss costs prior to making a decison on how and when to put a parcel tax measure to the voters.

I contacted the Registrar of Voters to get information on costs, and have done my best to accurately relate the information she provided.

Anyone who would like to have more information on the costs associated with putting the parcel tax measure to the voters may contact Cynthia Cornejo, the District Registrar of Voters. Her telephone number is 510-272-6933.

Comments (5)

Like this comment
Posted by mflanagin
a resident of Parkside
on Apr 2, 2009 at 8:37 pm

Response to:posted by John, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood

Read the ballot measure and get the facts. If you had gone to any of the district meetings you would know that they already discussed how much the ballot measure would cost and why they chose to do a June 2nd ballot. They are not hiding anything. You didn't have to call an outside person to get this information.

Like this comment
Posted by John
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2009 at 8:48 pm

I have a copy of the ballot measure right in front of me.
I have gone to the district meetings.
I know the School Board had the option to choose a less expensive way to put a parcel tax measure to the voters, but chose the most expensive option on the advice of their parcel tax consultant who recommended a stand alone measure so PUSD could "win" the election.
I know the Budget FAQs provided by PUSD have wrong and incomplete information regarding the costs to put the parcel tax measure to the voters.
I also know that you didn't really read my post or you would have realized that I had re-posted an item placed on the blog by another poster and telling me "you didn't have to call an outside person to get this information" demonstrates what so many of the No on Parcel Tax people are saying - the Yes on Parcel Tax people respond emotionally, not logically to this issue.

Like this comment
Posted by Tom
a resident of Danbury Park
on Apr 3, 2009 at 12:45 am

I was looking on the internet and found that recently the State published a report here Web Link

and on page 23 it says that Pleasanton USD has filed an appeal in the courts appealing a decision that Pleasanton had to pay $30,000 in a case that is almost two years old (Aug 20, 2007) Web Link

I find it outrageous that Pleasanton USD is still spending money on lawyers to appeal an outcome that was in 2007. Just how much money is Pleasanton spending on lawyers and did the Board approve this lawsuit?

Are they spending $300,000 on lawyers to fight a $30,000 verdict?

How much money is the District paying for lawyers? This is ridiculous.

Like this comment
Posted by Jeb Bing
editor of the Pleasanton Weekly
on Apr 3, 2009 at 7:45 am

Jeb Bing is a registered user.

Just a reminder that we are restricting all posts related to the June 2 parcel tax measure to registered users of the Pleasanton Weekly Town Square forum. We have found that this keeps the conversations more civil and focused without any restriction on what posters say or the opinions they express.

Like this comment
Posted by Sensibly Save Our Schools
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Apr 3, 2009 at 8:21 am

Sensibly Save Our Schools is a registered user.

I encourage you to not just ask your questions on this blog, but to take them to PUSD and the School Board.

Like so many others, you're discovering that the more you research PUSD spending, the more you realize that PUSD budget problems are not simply because of state budget cuts, but poor financial decisions.

Please, ask PUSD to let you see records of all legal contracts/fees.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

GE's re-organization reaches San Ramon digital headquarters
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 1,865 views

Sound and Fury over Vile and Slur-ry
By Tom Cushing | 69 comments | 1,088 views

New state housing requirements could affect Pleasanton
By Jeb Bing | 2 comments | 408 views