Alum Rock Union School District, California, Bond Issue, Measure I (June 2016)

* Text of measure
* Ballot question
* Impartial analysis
* Support
* Official argument
* Opposition
* Official argument
* Path to the ballot
* See also
* External links
* Footnotes
* More
* Local ballot measures
* State ballot measures
* Local politics

Measure I: Alum Rock Union School District Bond Issue

The basics
Election date:
June 7, 2016
Status:
a Approved
Majority required:
55%
Topic:
Local school bonds
Amount: $140 million
Tax: Up to $30 per $100,000 in value
Matures in: Legal limit
Related articles
Local school bonds on the ballot

* * *

June 7, 2016 ballot measures in California

* * *

Santa Clara County, California ballot measures
See also
Alum Rock Union School District, California

A measure to issue bonds in order to fund school renovation and construction was on the ballot for Alum Rock Union School District voters in Santa Clara County, California, on June 7, 2016. It was approved.

| A yes vote was a vote in favor of increasing the district's debt by $140 million through issuing bonds in that amouns to fund school renovations and construction.

|

| A no vote was a vote against issuing the school bonds.

|

District officials estimated that the highest property tax rate required to repay the bond over the life of the loan at $30 per $100,000.[1]

A 55 percent supermajority vote was required for the approval of Measure I.

## Contents

* 1 Election results
* 2 Text of measure
* 2.1 Ballot question
* 2.2 Impartial analysis
* 2.3 Full text
* 3 Support
* 3.1 Supporters
* 3.2 Arguments in favor
* 3.2.1 Official argument
* 4 Opposition
* 4.1 Opponents
* 4.2 Arguments against
* 4.2.1 Official argument
* 5 Path to the ballot
* 6 Recent news
* 7 See also
* 8 External links
* 9 Footnotes

## Election results

Alum Rock Union School District, Measure I

Result| Votes| Percentage
a Yes|  12,461|  78.75%
No| 3,363| 21.25%

Election results from Santa Clara County Elections Office

## Text of measure[edit]

### Ballot question[edit]

The following question appeared on the ballot:[2]

“  |

To improve local neighborhood schools, fix leaky, deteriorated roofs, improve fire safety, repair/upgrade classrooms, improve student safety and security, renovate outdated restrooms, upgrade heating/ventilation/electrical systems for energy efficiency, and computer technology, shall $139,999,671.60 of Alum Rock Union Elementary School District bonds approved by the voters in June 2008, be reapproved at legal rates to renovate, acquire, construct, repair classrooms, sites, facilities/equipment, with independent audits, citizens’ oversight, no money for administrators’ salaries and all money controlled locally? [3]

| ”

|
|

### Impartial analysis[edit]

The following impartial analysis of the measure was prepared by the office of the Santa Clara County Counsel:

“  |

Upon approval of 55 percent of the votes cast by voters in an election and subject to specified accountability measures, California law permits school districts to issue bonds, secured by the levy of ad valorem taxes on property within a district, for the purpose of construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of school facilities, or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities.

The Board of Trustees (Board) of the Alum Rock Union School (District) proposes issuing bonds in the amount of $139,999,671.60. As identified in the measure, bond proceeds would be used for purposes including, but not limited to: (l) fixing aging classrooms bathrooms, and leaky roofs; (2) replacing and upgrading security systems, fire alarms, and sprinklers; (3) providing instructional technology; 4) fixing outdated wiring; (5) improving science and computer labs; and (6) improving access to computers. A detailed list of projects and allowed expenditures is included within the full text of the Measure.

The District's resolution ordering the election and submitting to voters the question of whether bonds shall be issued and sold does not include comprehensive information about other District debt obligations that may exist. However, the resolution states that the District has issued $39,000,328.40 under the District's Measure G, a $179 million bond measure approved at an election on June 3, 2008. The resolution states the intent to reapprove the issuance of $139,999,671.60 of Measure G bonds as new bonds without increasing the total amount of authorized District debt. The Measure states that, if approved, the Board will not authorize any additional bonds under the 2008 Measure G, and that the Board has covenanted that it will cancel and not authorize issuance of Measure G bonds in a like amount.

The California Constitution provides that proceeds of school district bond measures cannot be used for teacher and administrator salaries and other school operating expenses, and requires independent annual performance and financial audits. State law requires the establishment of an independent citizens' oversight committee for ensuring that bond proceeds are expended only for the school facilities on the bond project list included in Measure _.

The District's stated estimate of the highest tax rate to be levied to fund the proposed bonds -- based on estimated assessed valuations available at the time of filing of the tax rate statement of the Measure -- is $30.00 per $100,000 of assessed value during fiscal year 2017-18.

Measure I was placed on the ballot by the Board.

A "yes" vote is a vote to authorize the issuance and sale of the bonds in the amount of $139,999,671.60 to be secured by the levy of ad valorem taxes on property located within the District.

A “no” vote is a vote to not authorize the issuance and sale of the bonds in the amount of $139,999,671.60 to be secured by the levy of ad valorem taxes on property located within the District.

[3]

| ”

|
|

—Santa Clara County Counsel[1]

### Full text[edit]

The full text of the measure is available here.

## Support[edit]

### Supporters[edit]

The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of the measure:[1]

* Raymond Mueller, Citizens’ Oversight Committee, chair
* Julie Ramirez, Citizens’ Oversight Committee, parent representative
* Maria Martinez, Alum Rock Educators Association, corresponding secretary
* Anthony Ortega, retired community member

### Arguments in favor[edit]

#### Official argument[edit]

The following official argument was submitted in favor of the measure:[1]

“  |

Vote YES on I to repair and modernize local schools in the Alum Rock Union Elementary School District to ensure that all students learn in safe, modern classrooms. Measure I invests in a better future for all students by providing access to 21st century science and computer labs.

Many local schools are 40 to 74 years old and desperately need repairs. Measure I removes mold and asbestos from our schools, fixes leaky, deteriorated roofs, and completes many other needed repair projects.

Measure I replaces aging, inefficient electrical, heating and air conditioning systems, saving Alum Rock Union Elementary School District hundreds of thousands of dollars each year in utility and maintenance costs - money that can be put back into the classroom to improve academic instruction in core subjects.

Vote YES on I.

* Remove hazardous materials, like mold and asbestos.
* Replace aging, inefficient electrical, heating and air conditioning systems.
* Fix leaking roofs, windows and doors.
* Ensure safe access for disabled students.
* Modernize classrooms and provide 21st century science and computer labs

Every penny of Measure I will be used to improve local schools.

* NO funds can be taken by the State.
* All funds will be controlled locally, with citizen oversight and annual audits to ensure funds are used as promised.
* Local schools will be eligible for millions of dollars in State matching funds.
* No funds can be used for administrators' salaries, benefits or pensions.

Measure I invests in our students' future, providing them with the science, math and computer skills needed to succeed in high school, college and or the careers of the 21st century.

Measure I creates local construction jobs and pumps millions of dollars into our local economy, supporting our local businesses.

JOIN PARENTS, TEACHERS, LOCAL BUSINESSES AND COMMUNITY LEADERS. Vote YES on Measure I.[3]

| ”

|
|

## Opposition[edit]

### Opponents[edit]

Mark W.A. Hinkle, president of the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, signed the official argument against the measure.[1]

### Arguments against[edit]

#### Official argument[edit]

The following official argument was submitted in opposition to the measure:[1]

“  |

In 2012 district voters passed a $125,000,000 bond measure to “replace inefficient/aging heating, ventilation, and electrical systems." That's just 4 years ago.

Were the construction projects funded by that $125,000,000 so shoddy that it all has to be replaced a mere 4 years later?

lf so, why should we trust the proponents, this time around, to get it right?

Answer: We shouldn't.

lf you wanted a personal computer for your home or business, would you take out a 30-year loan at an unknown interest rate to pay for it?

That would be nuts, especially because most technology is obsolete in 3-5 years. But, that’s what the proponents of Measure I want to do.

Bond interest rates can legally go as high as 12% per year.

Would you buy a house or condo without knowing the interest rate? That would be nuts, right?

But, that’s what the proponents of Measure I are asking you to approve.

And since bonds are like mortgages, in that they have to be paid back with interest, what is the real cost of this $139,999,671.60 bond measure?

lf we assume a 3% rate, that's $4,199,990.15 per year, just in interest.

Over 30 years that’s to $125,999,704.44 in interest plus the original amount of $139,999,671.60, for a total cost of $265,999,376.04.

What makes schools great is great teachers, not fancy classrooms or the trendiest computer technology.

By the time this bond is paid off, the technology it funded will be long obsolete, probably rotting in some landfill dump.

School funding should be used to pay teachers, not to pay bond interest for the next 30 years.

Just say NO to Measure I.[3]

| ”

|
|

## Path to the ballot[edit]

See also: Laws governing local ballot measures in California

This measure was put on the ballot through a vote of the governing officials of Alum Rock Union School District, California.

## Recent news[edit]

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Alum Rock Union School District Local school bonds Measure I. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

Alum Rock Union School District, California, Bond Issue, Measure I (June 2016) - Google News

## See also[edit]

Local measures

* Local measures in 2016
* Local school bonds ballot measures

* Santa Clara County measures

California

* June 7, 2016 measures in California
* Local ballot measures, California
* Alum Rock Union School District, California

News and analysis

* State and local preemption conflicts
* Measures advancing national agendas

|
|

## External links[edit]

| Suggest a link

|

* Santa Clara County Elections Office website

## Footnotes[edit]

1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Santa Clara County Elections Office, "June 7th Primary Measures - Analyses and Arguments," accessed April 21, 2016
2. ↑ Santa Clara County, California, "List of Local Measures," March 30, 2016
3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.

v • e

Local ballot measures in California

Counties|

Alameda • Alpine • Amador • Butte • Calaveras • Colusa • Contra Costa • Del Norte • El Dorado • Fresno • Glenn • Humboldt • Imperial • Inyo • Kern • Kings • Lake • Lassen • Los Angeles • Madera • Marin • Mariposa • Mendocino • Merced • Modoc • Mono • Monterey • Napa • Nevada • Orange • Placer • Plumas • Riverside • Sacramento • San Benito • San Bernardino • San Diego • San Francisco • San Joaquin • San Luis Obispo • San Mateo • Santa Barbara • Santa Clara • Santa Cruz • Shasta • Sierra • Siskiyou • Solano • Sonoma • Stanislaus • Sutter • Tehama • Trinity • Tulare • Tuolumne • Ventura • Yolo • Yuba

* * *

Analysis|

Laws governing local ballot measures in California • Ballot measure information on California county websites • Costs of administering local elections • Required approval rates for local California ballot measures

* * *

Political topics|

Advisory votes • Binding arbitration • Business taxes • City charters • Election and voting laws • Gambling • Gann overrides • Hotel taxes • Incorporations • Immigration • Jurisdictional boundaries • Labor • Marijuana • Marijuana taxes • Mottos • Municipal bonds • Parcel taxes • Pensions • Project-Labor Agreements • Recall • Red light cameras • Rent control • Salaries of local officials • Sales taxes • School bonds • Term limits • Utility user taxes • Vehicle registration taxes • Zoning and land use

* * *

Tax measures|

Business taxes • Hotel taxes • Marijuana taxes • Oil and gas • Parcel taxes • Real estate transfer taxes • Sales taxes • Utility user taxes • Vehicle registration taxes

v • e

State of California
Sacramento (capital)

|

Elections |

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2026 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government |

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy