At last week’s School Board meeting, members reached a three-pronged agreement regarding a parcel tax as a rescue device.
Scott Zeidman, who may be the plan’s most enthusiastic advocate, described the proposal:
“First, we agreed to hire a professional company to survey the community and make a determination if a parcel tax is feasible in these tough economic times in the city of Culver City.
“If it is feasible, what is the right amount to be asking?
“Then, who should be exempted from participating in a parcel tax?
“And also, how should we go about promoting a parcel tax? How should we explain this is for the schools, that it will not become lost in the bureaucratic nightmare that is Sacramento?
“Hopefully,” said Mr. Zeidman, “if everything works out, this will be on the November ballot.”
After initiating whirlwind rounds of staff layoffs and shaved programs through the late winter and early spring, the School Board turned to at least an exploration of a parcel tax wit a good stiff push from Mr. Zeidman.
He is supporting a parcel tax “because the state has cut us by 15 percent over the last two years, and because more cuts are coming. Our expenses are pretty static. So that 15 percent means larger class sizes and fewer programs.”
Final calculations are due from Gov. Schwarzenegger after the May 19 election.
Candidates and Parcel Tax May Intersect
An enormously energetic attorney/businessman in the middle of his second year on the School Board, Mr. Zeidman hopes the survey results will be available by late July, early August.
For a separate reason, that could be a fascinating piece of timing.
Early August coincides with the deadline for prospective candidates to sign up for the School Board election, and three members figure to be leaving after November.
With a fresh field of candidates and a potential parcel tax looming, late summer could be combustible for the school community.
Mr. Zeidman is so convinced of the worthiness of a parcel tax, he already has started to campaign.
“I believe a parcel tax is necessary, and I believe our community will stand up for our children.,” he says.
“It’s a win-win. Here is why.
“For the sake of argument, let’s say it’s a hundred dollars a year, for 30 cents a day, give or take. When you buy a house in Culver City, or anywhere, one of the first questions you ask is, ‘How are the schools?’ ‘What is the district like?’
“So if we do a hundred dollars a year — again, I don’t know the exact number — the money we raise will increase property values ten-fold of that hundred. You will increase property values a thousand dollars or more a year as a result of giving that hundred dollars. So it is an investment in your own property.”
Mr. Zeidman was asked if he expected significant pushback.
“Honestly,” he said, “I don’t. I realize that a hundred dollars, two hundred dollars, fifty dollars in these times is tough.
“But look at the good we can do for this fantastic community where I have lived all my life. The people in Culver City will come around. They will help out.
“Especially if we do it correctly.
“By that I mean framing the issue correctly and clearly, and explaining where the money is going to go.
“People wonder, ‘Why am I giving money to a district if I don’t know what you are going to do with it?’
“We have to explain it so we can gain the public’s trust. I hope I have, we have, the new Board, the trust of the public, that we are not going to squander the money.”
