In 2013 the School District replaced its formerly progressive support tax with a single flat rate tax. Changing to a regressive flat tax resulted in 76% of Piedmont homeowners paying 6% to 21% more for those on parcels less than 10,000 square feet. Owners of large parcels, commercial properties and multi-unit buildings saw reductions of 7% to 80%.
In 2019 the District partially corrected the regressive tax by adding a supplemental progressive per square foot of building tax. However 80% of the support tax structure remains a regressive flat rate tax. The better solution in 2019 would have been to have a single per square foot of building tax resulting in a 100% progressive tax structure. Several large local districts have gone to this model and their tax burden pales in comparison to Piedmont’s.
The family in a large home will likely put more children in our schools than a smaller home. A larger home will cost more initially and will sell for more than a smaller home of equivalent quality. In fairness those using more school resources and those that financially benefit at time of sale from our quality schools should pay a tax based on use and financial reward. Those that benefit more should pay more and that is the basis of a progressive tax structure.
A single progressive tax is especially needed here as Piedmont has the highest school tax and bond burden in the State. Is there even a close second?
While support for Measure P is robust so that teachers are fairly compensated, the reality is that a single progressive square foot of building tax is critically needed so that taxpayers are fairly encumbered. Taxpayers deserve a single progressive per square foot building tax considering the generous financial support we give our schools.
A no vote on Measure P is simply telling the School Board to put a single progressive tax before us ASAP. Fair is fair.
(Editor’s note: We ran an erroneous headline on Oct. 8 — “As a flat tax, Measure P is unfair to taxpayers” — and have since updated it to reflect the author’s intent. We apologize for the error.)
Forgive me for dumbing this conversation down, for my benefit if nothing else. Rick never said P was a flat tax. He objected to the flat tax in 2019 and is proposing a single progressive tax based on square footage as opposed to the flat/progressive hybrid structure we have now. His proposal is not on the ballot but his idea might be worth studying given enrollment trends.
Hi Hillary, I do not state that Measure P is a flat tax in my letter. Exedra has characterized my letter as stating Measure P is unfair. It is unfair in the sense that there is a better solution to generate School District needed revenue to retain teachers now and in the future, a solution that will cost many residents less.
I was the only resident to appear before the School Board in 2019 when the current tax structure was being considered. I advocated for a single progressive tax based on per square foot of building at that time. The Board retained the large regressive flat tax but did take my comments seriously as an additional tax based on per square foot of building was incorporated as Measure H. Measure H passed at 25 cents per square foot of building. Measure P doubles to 50 cents.
I advocate for a single progressive tax based on square foot of building to replace FYI 2024-2024 $2,991 flat tax Measure G and current Measure H. A single tax of $1.50 per square foot will closely generate the same revenue as current Measure G and proposed Measure P. Residents can easily understand the difference by multiplying the square footage of their home by $1.50 and comparing that to $2991 plus 50 cents per square footage. If your home is less than 2,991 square feet you will pay less with a single $1.50 per square foot tax.
Hi Rick — just wanted to clarify that Measure P is indeed a progressive tax. Homeowners will pay 50 cents per square foot of building improvements per year. It is not a flat tax.
Hope that clears up any confusion. Please vote YES on Measure P!