LIVERMORE — A member of a local taxpayers association is suing to put the brakes on a special May election called by the Livermore school district to ask voters to renew a parcel tax worth about $4 million a year.

The lawsuit, filed this week in Alameda County court, claims that the Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District is misleading voters with the language it uses in the 75-word ballot question, which is required by law to be a “true and impartial” description of the tax measure residents could vote for or against.

The ballot description of the tax measure says if approved, it would “renew expiring local school funding without increasing taxes,” and says the money “cannot be taken by the state.”

The tax money would be used to “preserve quality academics in math, science, reading, writing, engineering and technology; attract and retain qualified teachers; preserve TK-12 technology and elementary science specialists” and to “keep classroom technology and curriculum up-to-date,” according to the ballot description.

Advocates with the Alameda County Taxpayers Association say the wording is vague, deceives voters and is emblematic of a larger issue with many local and state measures, the kind called out by an Alameda County grand jury in its 2021 report.

Michelle Dawson, a spokesperson for Livermore Unified, said in a statement that the district is working with attorneys to address the lawsuit.

“We are confident that the structure and process used to initiate the proposed ballot measure stands on solid legal ground. It is unfortunate that our district will need to spend time, resources and taxpayer dollars to defend itself against claims we believe to be erroneous and unfounded,” Dawson said.

The lawsuit was filed by Jason Bezis, an attorney representing Alan Heckman, a Livermore resident and a member of the Alameda County Taxpayers Association, which has derided the school district for its choice to hold a special election, calling it wasteful, and for what it calls the “misleading” description of the parcel tax to voters.

The lawsuit aims to have the court halt the May 3 special election, and require amendments to the ballot question language.

Bezis ​​said phrases like “cannot be taken by the state” are misleading because “there’s no debate whatsoever” that the money would be locally controlled.

“It’s supposed to be neutral, but the reality is these ballot questions are written by outside consultants and they test the phrases through voter surveys,” Bezis said.

“The school district tries to sneak in language that tested well in the voter survey, so they’re trying to feed buzzwords or catchphrases back to the voters that move the needle towards yes,” he said in an interview.

The parcel tax measure is a renewal of a parcel tax voters first approved in 2004, then extended in 2008 and again in 2014.

The current tax, Measure G, charges landowners in the school district boundaries a tax of $138 per parcel annually. The district includes Livermore in Alameda County and a small portion of Contra Costa County. The tax is set to expire in July.

The new tax measure, Measure A, would levy the same amount of tax as the current one, and would last for seven years.

Marcus Crawley, the head of the taxpayers association, said the school district is trying to “paper over” the reality by using phrasing like “without raising taxes” and not giving voters clear, unbiased information.

“They say ‘We’re just extending the existing tax.’ Well, they’re not extending the existing tax; the existing tax expires, and then it’s over with. So this is a new tax, and they weasel around in a number of different ways to avoid saying this is a new tax,” Crawley said in an interview.

Bezis also said although the ballot question says there would be “independent citizen oversight” of the taxes collected, the full ballot measure text does not include a guarantee to back that up.

The tax measure is considered a special tax, and would require yes votes from two-thirds of all votes cast in order to pass, and is supposed to be used for specific purposes. Crawley said he takes issue with what he called “very vague” wording about how the money would be spent.

“They might as well kiss off the specific purposes because it can be spent on anything,” Crawley said of the ballot question description.

The lawsuit also claims the Livermore school district’s board, which voted on Feb. 1 to call for a special election on May 3, committed an oversight when it didn’t include formal notice to voters that the election would be a strictly mail-in election, with no polling places open on the day of the election.

Bezis maintains the election results could be void because of the missing notice.

Source: www.mercurynews.com