Proposed versions of parcel tax would exempt seniors. Majority of those polled are renters.
By Carolanne Sudderth/Ocean Park Gazette
According to a telephone poll conducted by the Santa Monica-Malibu School District, if a parcel tax passes at all, the vote will be close. The sting of defeat still in their nostrils after Measure EE failed to pass in November, the district is looking carefully at plans for a second go at a parcel tax this June. To this end, the cash-strapped district commissioned a little market research to determine which of three possible scenarios would be most palatable to voters. The results came back Friday, Jan. 17.
Measure EE would have plunked an additional $300 onto every property in the city on top of $98-per-parcel Measure Y, the “last-ever” parcel tax, which passed in 1998. EE received a majority of the votes, but not the 66 2/3 percent needed for passage. Since then, the situation has become more tenuous. Gov. Gray Davis has proposed additional cuts to the state budget, which may slice an additional $11 million from the district budget this year alone.
At the district’s behest, market researchers Baselice and Associates dialed some 800 people at random. Of these, 402 completed the 15-minute survey regarding the following three tax alternatives:
- Alternative P-A flat tax of $225 per parcel
- Alternative Q-A flat $60 per parcel plus $.07 per square foot
- Alternative R-A flat $110 per parcel plus $.05 per square foot.
All would be in place for six years and feature an exemption for seniors. Estimated taxes ranging from $36 to $66 per annum would be passed through to the “average renter.” On three different occasions, during the phone interviews, participants were asked if they strongly favored, somewhat favored, somewhat opposed or strongly opposed each of the possible measures.
All three measures received more than 50 percent approval, with “P” receiving 60 percent-not that far from the two-thirds needed for passage. In all three cases, more than 10 percent remained undecided.
Pollsters then read a more comprehensive description of each measure.
Those in favor dropped markedly; and many of those undecided the first time around threw their votes in with the opposition. Alternative R received less than a majority.
Participants were then read a list of potential propaganda-isms and asked to note which ones made them more favorable toward the parcel tax. The highest scorers were:
1. Money is needed to make up revenue lost at the state level and to prevent a serious deterioration in the quality of Santa Monica-Malibu schools.
2. New tax revenues are needed to preserve the existing core curriculum for all grade levels.
3. The upcoming measure includes strict taxpayer accountability with annual audits by a special citizen’s oversight committee.
Pollsters continued: “Now that you know more about the measures that would avoid deterioration in the quality of education to keep class sizes small, require citizens’ oversight and annual fiscal audits … ,” then read a summary of each alternative. Participants were asked to vote again, after they were read a summary of each measure. The yes votes rose markedly on all measures, results indicating that any of the three measures would garner a majority of the vote, yet, none received the 66 2/3 percent needed for passage. However, those polled seemed more confused, and the number of those who felt strongly about the measure had diminished in both the pro and con courts.
Learning from the past
Of those opposed to the failed Measure EE, 73 percent said the problem was money-too much, too long a period, that previous taxes (and the state lottery) were supposed to take care of these things, or that there were better options available to the schools.
Others felt it was unfair-that the school district should cut its budget, and a similar bond was passed a few years back. Some felt that Santa Monicans were already paying too much for non-Santa Monicans; money from the last bond issue went toward capital improvements in Malibu schools, Malibu contributes far less to the school system, and too many children are being bussed into the district. And 7 percent questioned the fact that the district’s requests for more money are an annual occurrence, but that there never seems to be any effort put toward finding out what isn’t working and fixing it.
Committee questions
Save our Schools Parcel Tax Committee member Ralph Mechur noted that seniors seem “really scared.”
The market research company president, Mike Baselice, acknowledged that if the senior exemption were removed, support would drop. “A lot of [seniors] would go the other way,” he said. “Without the exemption, support really goes down.”
He noted that the exemption is not automatic. Seniors will have to apply for it.
Committee member John Petz asked where the naysayers would likely spring from. Baselice said that would depend on the measure. “Malibu voters are much more in favor of P than Q. You have a history here,” he said. “You have to be very careful about Malibu voters.”
Committee member Matt DiNolfo added that the 18- to 39-age group also had a few more points in the “No” slot. Other groups more likely to vote no included residents of Pico and Mid-City neighborhoods, those registered with the fringe parties or as “decline to state,” male Republicans, renters and apartment dwellers.
Herein lies a possible fly in the ointment. Forty one percent of those polled were renters. However, Santa Monica’s recent community survey indicates that the number of renters is closer to 60 percent, and the United States Census puts it at 70 percent. Traditionally, Santa Monica renters are more likely to turn out on Election Day.
There are, however, questions that remain unanswered that will affect all residents, but renters in particular.
1. Are the square feet in question those in the lot (the parcel itself) or in the building that sits on the parcel?
2. If the tax is assessed per parcel and divided among the tenants, will the amount paid by each vary depending upon the number of units? For example, tenants of a small duplex would split the total assessment between them, whereas those residing in the 500-unit Santa Monica shores end up paying less than $1 apiece.
3. How would the senior exemption be figured for older renters? Would the exemption kick in if the landlord were over 65? Or would it be based on the tenants’ age? If tenant-based, would the landlord be responsible for making up the difference?
Interestingly, a comparison of the three plans indicates that Q is the least expensive for parcels of less than 2,500 square feet and Prop R is also less than the flat rate, P. However, around 2,500 square feet a change takes place-the three plans merge at the $225 mark, and thereafter the tax begins to soar for anything over that space. (Twenty percent of those surveyed fall into the 2,500-plus category.)
Committee Member Louise Jaffe asked how rewording would affect the question and how many people would be likely to base their decision on the first amount named-$60, $110 or $225-without figuring in the square footage contingency, and Baselice said these would account for about a third.
The Parcel Tax (Save Our Schools) Committee will reconvene to make a final decision at 4 p.m., Friday, Jan. 24, at the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified District offices, 1651 16th Street in Santa Monica.