Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parcel Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews draft parcel-tax resolution as trustees debate class-size wording
Summary
Mill Valley trustees heard a presentation from consultants on a draft parcel-tax resolution and debated whether the ballot language should explicitly promise 'small class sizes.' Presenters said polling led them to shorten the 75-word ballot line; the full resolution retains class-size language. The board will consider final language next month.
The Mill Valley School Board on Jan. 15 reviewed a consultant-drafted resolution to renew and reauthorize the district's parcel tax and discussed how the measure should describe class-size protections.
Lauren Ash of Team Civics and Jocelyn Peach of DWK, the district's counsel on the measure, presented the draft resolution and its exhibits and noted key procedural deadlines for placing a measure on the June primary ballot. The consultants said the draft combines a renewal and a reauthorization and that the short ballot question must fit a 75-word limit.
The presenters described the measure’s terms as drafted for board feedback: the text the board reviewed references a combined eight‑year proposal with a $1,520 figure included in packet materials and continues an existing parcel-charge framework (the packet also references a previously enacted $234 charge that expired in 2021). Counsel and consultants told trustees the draft includes an annual escalator that would begin July 1, 2027, and that the packet estimates the measure could raise roughly $14.9 million annually. The consultants said exemptions for seniors and Social Security disability recipients were included and that accountability provisions would include an oversight committee and annual audits.
Public commenter Erin Fraser, who identified herself as an MBTA co‑president and lead negotiator, pressed trustees on why the short ballot language no longer uses the phrase 'maintain small class sizes.' "I didn't see anything that indicates that including the language maintain small class sizes would hurt our chances of getting this measure to pass," Fraser said, warning that removing the phrase could weaken support among educators and some parents.
Lauren Ash responded that the measure language in the 75‑word ballot summary was adjusted after EMC Research conducted scientific polling; she said that phrase "did perform lower than other items in the polling," and that because the short ballot text must be concise, the team selected the most broadly resonant phrases. Ash and Peach emphasized that the full text of the resolution and the ballot pamphlet include more detailed language listing class-size preservation among the uses the district could fund, while the shortened ballot question focuses on the top poll‑tested priorities.
Trustees debated whether to substitute wording in the resolution — several said they were uncomfortable with the term 'manageable class sizes' but acknowledged the short ballot question must be compact and persuasive to a broad electorate. Board members also asked where the 5% annual adjustment appears in materials; counsel said the ballot summary references annual adjustments but that the specific escalator percentage is documented in the full measure text.
The presentation was for feedback only; trustees indicated the resolution will return for formal board action and a public hearing next month.
What happens next: The district will return the draft resolution with any edits for a public hearing and possible board approval at the February meeting, ahead of the county deadline for June-ballot submittal.
