Repairing the infrastructure in the Culver City Unified School District may require passing a bond measure according a high-ranking school board member.
But how that proposal could affect a potential plan to revisit a popular parcel tax passed four years ago remains unclear.
CCUSD Board President Katherine Paspalis said last month the capital projects planned for the district’s infrastructure would require an extra infusion of funds to complete them all.
The district is planning to hire a consultant to take the pulse of the community and gauge the interest in a bond measure, board member Laura Chardiet told the News.
They also plan to survey residents on what they say is a great need for a school bond.
Chardiet said if Culver City residents saw the condition that its facilities are in, they would support passing a bond. “A picture is worth a thousand words,” she said.
With the news that in order to fully pay for planned capital improvements at the high school football field, the Robert Frost Auditorium and other school district buildings and a slate of approved tax measures in recent memory, the question becomes: are Culver City voters willing to tax themselves again to support their local schools?
I 2009, Culver City voters approved Measure EE, a parcel tax that added $96 to the property polls of homeowners and landlords. The levy passed with nearly of the electorate voting in favor of the tax, which generated $1.2 million for Culver City schools.
A transient occupancy tax for hotels, known as the bed tax, was approved in April. Known as Measure X, it raised the city’s hotel tax by 2 %, in line with the majority of the Westside.
The tax is charged in California when occupying a room or rooms or other living space in a hotel, inn, tourist home or house, motel or other lodging for a period of 30 days or more.
And in November, residents passed Measure Y, a half cent sales tax ballot initiative.
Supporters of the parcel tax measure have been contemplating extending Measure EE this fall.
Madeline Erhlich, the co-chair of the campaign of the parcel tax, said at first blush the notion of a bond measure might sound appealing to some.
“With interest rates low at this time, economically it sounds like a good idea. But before one says (yes), there are many questions that need to be considered,” cautioned Erhlich, a former school board member.
Among the questions that she thinks are pertinent to ask are how much would the bond be for, when would the bond have to be repaid and what is the interest rate.
“Would senior citizens be exempt? What specifically would the bond money be used for? Does it need a majority or two thirds majority to pass? Is the interest payment deferred or on going?” Ehrlich would ask. “Would there be an oversight committee?”
Culver City Chamber of Commerce President Steven Rose said voters have typically been supportive of the local schools, sighting a past bond measure in 1998 and Measure EE.
“I think that (a bond) would probably pass,” he said.
Erhlich noted that because of a Nov. 6 statewide education tax that was approved, voters may feel there is no real urgency for a bond.
“I think that the electorate may feel that they just passed Prop. 30 that was supposed to cure all the financial ills of school districts,” she noted. “ However, we know that this may not be true if Gov. (Jerry) Brown has other ideas on how to disperse those funds.”
Proposition 30 raised income taxes on those make over $250,000 a year. It also bumped the state sales tax from 7.25 to 7.50%.
The tax measure will allocate 89% of the temporary tax revenues to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges.
Erlich also pointed out how the federal sequestration, which took effect on March 1, could play a factor in how governments are impacted financially.
Rose said the chamber would need to know more about the amount of the bond as well as other details before the organization could support one. “We would want to know for how much it will be and what type of bond overwrite it has,” he explained.
Erhlich said the questions she raised regarding a possible bond apply as well to an extension of Measure EE.
“As far as the parcel tax is concerned, some of these same issues also apply. The promise of a five- year ‘temporary’ tax appears to have morphed into a permanent tax and that was a significant concern of many voters five years ago,” she said.
“Some Culver City School District critics may wonder why the school district sat on $12 million of capital improvement monies for so many years while cost of labor and materials escalated,” Erhlich added. “The bottom line is that if the school district wants to move forward with continuing the parcel tax and passing a bond, there will be a great need to answer the above questions and will need a carefully crafted marketing survey before moving forward.”
Chardiet, who supports the concept of a school bond measure, said the school board hopes to hire the consultant by the end of March or by early April.
