|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Jeremy Manson
The Mountain View Whisman School District has faced an onslaught of concerns this year over its budget, its decision-making processes, its relationship with the city, and the performance of its board and superintendent. Lost in all of this is the case for Measure AA, which is a critical piece of Mountain View Whisman’s budget puzzle.
As a district parent, I believe Measure AA is essential: regardless of future leadership, the district must secure funding to support its students and maintain educational programs.
The district anticipates a 10% budget shortfall without additional funding. While there are real concerns about how the district has spent some of its funds, those issues account for only 1-3% of the budget, far less than the projected deficit. Unfortunately, no concrete proposals have emerged to close this gap through budget cuts.
Measure AA is a proposed parcel tax that will appear on the November 2024 ballot. It requires a two-thirds majority to pass and will replace the current Measure B tax, which expires at the end of 2025. The funds from Measure AA are allocated for teacher salaries, special education, and STEAM programs.
Unlike the previous parcel tax, Measure AA introduces a tiered tax rate based on building size: smaller homes will have lower tax rates. It is projected to generate approximately $5.4 million annually, an increase from the $2.8 million annually from Measure B.
A failure to pass Measure AA could have unfortunate consequences. The district is being squeezed in two ways: it’s facing both higher expenditures and revenue loss.
The district will have unavoidable increases in spending over the next few years. The state is mandating an expansion of transitional kindergarten without providing funds for it. The district has agreed to increase teacher salaries if AA passes. And inflation has been making costs rise across the board.
On the other side of the ledger, major funding sources are drying up. Measure B is expiring, and, with it, the district will lose $2.8 million in annual revenue. In addition, for the last 20 years, the district has been leasing space to Google for their childcare center. This is currently bringing in $3 million a year. The childcare center is being closed, and no replacement tenant has been found.
Additional funds offered by the city from the Shoreline special tax district, which the district has recently decided to accept, will help bridge the budget gap. But there will still be a substantial budget shortfall: the district anticipates only $115 million in revenue in 2026, significantly below the $127 million it estimates is needed. At the rate it intends to spend, reserves will be exhausted in a few years.
While concerns about financial waste are valid, the actual impact of the controversial expenses is minor compared to the overall budget. Examples of waste, such as payments to a PR firm, total in the hundreds of thousands, rather than millions. Most of the budget supports teachers and classrooms, not administrative costs.
In response to the current crisis, the district has already begun taking action to ensure better budgetary stewardship. The superintendent who initiated these controversial expenses has been placed on leave. An oversight committee composed of community members has been formed to review the budget. Perhaps most importantly, we have the opportunity to elect a new board majority this year, and every candidate has promised that they will give the budget much closer scrutiny.
By law, Measure AA funds must be spent on teacher salaries, special education, and STEAM programs The board has passed a binding resolution that they cannot be spent on administrative salaries. I am confident that Measure AA funds will be spent where they are most needed: in our classrooms.
In summary, Measure AA is crucial for the Mountain View Whisman School District to effectively address current educational demands and mitigate the impacts of budget shortfalls. Its passage will ensure that the district can continue to support its students and teachers.
Jeremy Manson is a parent in the Mountain View Whisman School District.
Good read Jeremy. Thanks for pulling together this cogent piece of information for those of us who don’t pay attention. I think you make a very compelling argument that there is more downside to failing the parcel tax and we should vote for it. I am generally not a big fan of taxes, but this is a good one. If there is anything I double down on, it’s investment on education
One more thing: if people like their property prices, they should keep it high. Lots of families buy here just for the schools. Take that source of demand away…and prices go down.
Below quote means nothing, the admins already gave themselves 8% raises based on it passing. This shell game is so old, no one buys it anymore, you just reduce the STEAM, teacher salaries, & special education payments by 8% from the general fund or other budgeted money and then draw it from measure AA funds, with the net increase = 0. We all know the contract was already signed and the admins get an 8% raise and can only be renegotiated if this measure fails, not surprisingly that bit of info was left out of this article. If the budget was so dire, then why did they vote for raises for everyone BEFORE this measure passed?
“By law, Measure AA funds must be spent on teacher salaries, special education, and STEAM programs The board has passed a binding resolution that they cannot be spent on administrative salaries”.
What admins got an 8% raise? I thought the Supt got roughly the same raise as the teachers when you include their one time bonuses?
Here is the problem with the OPINION piece, 1) the Budget advisory committee was just set up – it was set up by the administrator-placed-on-leave (Superintendent) as a Superintendent’s advisory group! It was chose by him and his administrators and it reports to him! It is in no way directly chosen by the Board or advises the Board or is accountable to-the-Board.
2) The current (mostly out-going) Board has been demonstrably tone-deaf to its most concerned and connected constituency – public school parents. It (the majority in the current 4) has also seemed to ‘wage a civil war’ against this city’s constituency (represented by City Council). Very many of this think this is unacceptable!
3) The remaining Board members (one or two) and the new Board members (at least three) need to very much realize the magnitude of their Error! And hastily reform their Oversight! A new Parcel Tax Election can be done – after the Board has regained the Public’s Trust (significantly increasing survey polling Positive relative to Negative). Many of us voters consider this NECESSARY, including firing the Superintendent!. [who was ‘given’ increases and a guaranteed 3 year contract extension ?!!?]
ah – political ad for Devon Conley – school board president – for City Council? It will be very, very ‘interesting’ to see what That Plebiscite turns up for community confidence in her ‘running things’. The plebeians will speak!
Very low confidence in elected boards these days. There is this FCMAT referral that will be answered sometime after the election. It could reveal misfeasance on the part of the District staff. It’s pretty obvious that the board wouldn’t have hired an intern superintendent if they expected Rudolph to return. Though he has a contract normally they could terminate it early with some kind of mitigated damages. The results of this investigation might reduce the amount of damages that they would need to pay him. I think a vote on a matter like this needs to wait until there are new board members and a thorough investigation. So the only thing to do now is vote no.
Under Craig Goldman and other former superintendents, the district always kept spending within the budget.
For the last 9 years, since Mr. Rudolph has come to MVWSD, annual spending has exceeded income and the district is now 5 MILLION DOLLARS in DEBT.
I’m voting NO on AA because the district needs to learn how to manage the money it has. One place to start would be to eliminate the “executive coaching” for a superintendent who is in his 9th year of employment. Oh, you’ve heard about the low-interest $1 MILLION dollar loan the district offered to Rudolph so he could buy a house? The supe’s perks add up to literally hundreds of thousands of dollars, money that could have been spent hiring teachers.
City council candidate and school board president Devon Conley can answer questions about that.
My spouse and I served on district oversight committees when our kids were school age and came away realizing they were purely for political cover.
We have fabulous teachers. District office, not so much.
$5million in debt? What are you talking about? The reserves keep growing. Your math doesn’t math!
@Robin / There is a current City Council member who also “served” and felt exactly the same. Something about ‘the most useless civic committee/task force ever served on!’ (It was a School Site Council)
@Ramirez / U R correct! (not the grammar!). It is very hard ‘to read’ this district’s projections because they seem to automatically on-purpose underestimate their revenue! And what infuriates me – underspend their “Budget” on programs for ‘high needs’ students. [look it up]