Alameda voters add 32 cents per square foot to Property Taxes for Schools

[KC6ZLV]

As stated by previous posters, this raises taxes on one segment of the population. Being a homeowner doesn't mean you have cash to spare.

The percentage of renters in the City of Alameda is 49%. The renters just figured they would give it to homeowners thinking they are going to benefit from it. I think landlords should start itemizing these fees and send invoices to their renters. "$22.00 fee to cover additional costs related to the property tax you voted for." Who wants to make a bet that the same group of people who voted for it would complain about the fee being unfair?

Additionally, why should someone pay more taxes based on how large their property is? The size of their property has no bearing on anything.

Originally Posted by bhcompy

The problem is that Sacramento wants it that way. That is why property taxes for schools are pooled at the state level and distributed by the state government rather than staying in the district they were collected in. If enough municipalities vote for these property tax increases for local schools, the state will just take them all over again out of the interest of "fairness".

Property taxes are used withing the county they are collected in. The State doesn't get the money. The State does contribute money toward K-12 education to make up general lack of funding and to assist perpetually economically-depressed counties with education funding.

[yeahthatguy]

Originally Posted by KC6ZLV

As stated by previous posters, this raises taxes on one segment of the population. Being a homeowner doesn't mean you have cash to spare.

The percentage of renters in the City of Alameda is 49%. The renters just figured they would give it to homeowners thinking they are going to benefit from it. I think landlords should start itemizing these fees and send invoices to their renters. "$22.00 fee to cover additional costs related to the property tax you voted for." Who wants to make a bet that the same group of people who voted for it would complain about the fee being unfair?

Additionally, why should someone pay more taxes based on how large their property is? The size of their property has no bearing on anything.





Property taxes are used withing the county they are collected in. The State doesn't get the money. The State does contribute money toward K-12 education to make up general lack of funding and to assist perpetually economically-depressed counties with education funding.

Don't worry.. eventually there will only be the dummies here left who voted for all these tax hikes.. they'll first cheer at the reduced traffic ... then more leeches will come.. more jobs will leave and they'll be at how the taxes are too high.

[steel7]

Originally Posted by killer2021

What they (the schools) don't tell you is that most of that money won't get anywhere near the actual classrooms. Straight to pensions and overbloated salaries for lazy teachers.

Its like that statewide but the voters are easily fooled. Its for the children.....Not.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

68% Voted Yes

This is a great investment and I applaud Alamedans for showing this kind of support for their schools.

This is what other cities need to do instead of waiting for Sacramento and/or DC to bail them out.

I disagree.

I support school funding, I think education is the best way to stop a cycle of poverty. However, the pension system is so bloated that any measure like this is simply going toward paying pensions and not the students. If the unions would get their pension system under control, you wouldn't need more tax dollars to make smaller class sizes or fund athletics.

They should really just increase teacher salaries to attract quality people and end the pension system all together.