Measure T fails to receive two-thirds vote
On May 15, the Contra Costa Clerk Reporter published final results of the Acalanes Union High School District Measure T parcel tax election, showing that the measure failed to achieve the two-thirds majority required for passage. “Yes” votes totaled 19,448 or 63.57% of all votes counted.
The “No” vote of 11,115 was 50% higher than the negative vote total when AUHSD last went to the ballot for a parcel tax measure in 2014 suggesting increased resistance to supplementary taxation in the District, which includes Lamorinda and adjacent portions of Walnut Creek.
Leading opposition to the ballot measure was the Contra Costa Taxpayer’s Association, whose President, Marc Joffe, acted as a plaintiff on a successful ballot language lawsuit and wrote the opposition arguments in the ballot guide.
CoCoTax’s major concerns with the ballot measure included the District’s decision to call a costly special election and its use of misleading ballot language. For example, the original version of the 75-word ballot summary did not clearly state that the amount of the parcel tax would increase with the area cost of living.
With respect to the need for an additional $130 per year parcel tax (on top of the $301 already levied), opponents were critical of the large number of highly compensated administrative employees in the District and its emphasis on non-academic matters such as Diversity Equity and Inclusion.
Campaign finance disclosures reported to County Clerk Recorder showed that the campaign on behalf of Measure T raised over $140,000 in cash contributions and received non-monetary support worth over $20,000.
The “Yes” campaign sent multiple mailers and text messages while also blanketing social media. “Advocates should take pause from the fact that they raised over $7 per Yes vote and still failed to win“ Joffe said. “The tens of thousands donated by local educational foundations and parent teacher organizations would have been better spent on programs for area high school students.”
Several of the donating organizations are Section 501(c)3 tax-exempt charitable organizations. “While they may have not violated the letter of IRS regulations, channeling charitable donations to election campaigning seems to run contrary to the spirit of the laws governing 501(c)3 non-profits,” Joffe concluded.