Petaluma board votes to place $129 parcel tax on potential Nov. 4 ballot, preserves option to withdraw by Aug. 13

The Petaluma City Elementary board on a majority vote approved a resolution to place an education parcel tax on the Nov. 4, 2025 ballot, with a plan to meet Aug. 12 to decide whether to withdraw the measure by the county's Aug. 13 filing deadline.

Superintendent Matthew Harris said the district faces an approximate $5,000,000 shortfall tied to the end of one-time federal and state pandemic funding and rising staffing costs. "We added more nurses. We added more mental health staff," Harris said, adding that staffing rose about 15% since before the pandemic and that the district must find roughly $3,000,000 more in reductions unless new revenue materializes.

Board members spent more than an hour weighing timing, turnout and cost. District counsel Meredith (district counsel) and a county elections official explained calendar constraints tied to the governor and legislature: the board would have until Aug. 13 to withdraw if it files by this Friday, but the governor and legislators have until about Aug. 22 to finalize any statewide special-election plan. Meredith said the picture is "a bit fuzzy," and added that the district would be in a stronger position if a statewide election occurs because turnout — and likely voter support for parcel taxes — would be higher.

The proposed parcel tax rate discussed in the meeting was $129 per parcel. Superintendent Harris and staff said a measure at that level would yield about $3,000,000 in revenue. Staff also provided an estimated range of county election costs for Sonoma County only: roughly $166,000 to $444,000 depending on ballot length and other factors; county cost estimates did not include legal, consultant or outreach costs. Staff told the board the district's prior parcel-tax effort used surveys costing about $35,000, mailings around $12,000 each and a consultant fee of roughly $20,000 (those figures were for the prior combined elementary and secondary effort and would need to be apportioned if repeated).

Board members raised concerns that a standalone local election would likely have lower turnout than one paired with a statewide special election called by the governor, increasing the district's share of election costs and potentially lowering the chance of passage. Board Member Joanna (board member) called the timing "rushed" and said she would not want the district to risk significant dollars without clearer evidence that voters would back the measure. Board Member Caitlin (board member) said she was "all over the place" on timing and noted prior experience with polling and door-knocking influenced results in the district's previous measure.

After discussion, a board member moved to approve the resolution to place the parcel tax measure on the Nov. 4 ballot; another board member seconded the motion. The board voted in favor and the president announced the motion passed. The board also agreed to schedule a special meeting for Tuesday, Aug. 12 to review updated information from the state pro tem's office and labor partners and to decide whether to withdraw by the Aug. 13 county deadline. Staff were directed to contact the pro tem's office and the county registrar and to reserve time on Aug. 13 to file a withdrawal if the board decides to rescind the measure.

Votes at a glance - Provisional Internship Permit for Kara Kling to teach preschool inclusion (South County Consortium, 2025-26): motion moved and seconded; approved by the board (vote recorded as voice vote in meeting). - Provisional Internship Permit for Maria Maldonado to teach transitional kindergarten at Valley Vista Waldorf School (2025-26): motion moved and seconded; approved by the board (voice vote). - Resolution 20526-2, calling an election to approve an education parcel tax (proposed $129 per parcel) for the Nov. 4, 2025 consolidated election: motion moved and seconded; approved by majority vote. The board scheduled an Aug. 12 special meeting and retained the ability to withdraw the measure by the county filing deadline of Aug. 13.

The board's discussion emphasized three paths the district could take: 1) make additional budget cuts now; 2) delay cuts and seek a future local parcel tax (as soon as Nov. 4 if filed and not withdrawn); or 3) wait for a June 2026 or later election cycle that would allow more community outreach, polling and campaign planning. Multiple board members and staff noted that even if a Nov. measure passes, parcel tax revenue would not appear on property tax bills until fiscal year 2026-27 under county tax-roll timing.

Board members asked staff for additional data, including a breakdown of prior campaign spending and the results of previous outreach and polling to identify which precincts and age groups produced votes. Staff agreed to provide past presentation materials on the prior parcel-tax effort.

The board adjourned after confirming the special meeting date and next steps.