Part of the Bay Area News Group

Second parcel tax lawsuit in Alameda

By epearlman
Thursday, August 28th, 2008 at 10:33 am in Development, Island Life, Parcel tax, Prop. 13, Schools.

A second lawsuit was filed Monday in Alameda County Court against Measure H, the school parcel tax that passed with the support of just over two-thirds of Alameda voters in early June.

The first suit, filed last week by Pleasanton-based lawyer David Brillant on behalf of George J. Borikas is thought to have been supported and funded by several dozen local businesses. The second was filed by the high-powered law firm, Reed Smith, on behalf of local developer, John Beery.

School Board President Bill Schaff:

We’re sad to see another lawsuit. We would like to try to find some common ground with the business community…we still don’t have a state budget, we know we’ll still have an underfunding issue and we have to find some resolution that is good for our kids and that also can work for the business community.

You can look at both cases here, by entering the case numbers. Borikas is VG08405316 and Beery is RG08405984.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • http://alamedajournal.com Lon

    It was reported before the election in a newspaper article that small business owners brought up their concerns in a meeting before the election, and all they got was a shrug with no response from the school district. Now the school board wants to work it out? And meanwhile letters to the editors are threatening boycots of businesses in Alameda.

    Would it have been possible for the school district or their consultant to have worked with various business groups when drafting the proposition and hopefully avoid this? If so any idea why they didn’t?

  • Stan

    Lon, As far as I know, a measure can’t be changed once it’s been approved (in this case by the Board of Education) and then put on the ballot. So the district couldn’t have amended it.

    Also, who said the district just “shrugged” — a reporter who witnessed it or a complaining business person? Sounds like hearsay to me, but that’s sort of beside the point, which is that the district couldn’t have amended the measure once it was on the ballot.

    As to meeting with the business groups — I don’t know the details exactly, but I know there was a very tight deadline for getting this measure written and submitted by early March. Remember that the Board of Education only meets every two weeks and I’m pretty sure it took a full month for them to gather the information they needed to approve a parcel tax.

  • Stan

    Oh–forgot to write: the governor released his proposed budget in mid January. Then it took a couple weeks for the district to figure out how the proposed cuts would affect AUSD. Add that to the time it took the Board of Ed to gather the research (and have the meetings) needed to approve putting a parcel tax on the ballot and I think you end up with something like a week to get the parcel tax written.

    Others more in the know can correct me on this, but that was my impression last spring.