Voters approve $165 million high school bond measure Around Town, posted by Editor, The Almanac Online, on Feb 7, 2008 at 10:14 am
Voters strongly approved Measure J, the proposal to borrow $165 million through bond issues to pay for new facilities in the Sequoia Union High School District, which includes Woodside and Menlo-Atherton High Schools.
With all 211 precincts reporting, the measure passed with a 65.5 percent "yes" vote Tuesday.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, February 6, 2008, 12:15 AM
Posted by POed, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Feb 7, 2008 at 10:14 am
What a misleading headline. The measure should not have passed at all, and WOULD NOT have passed if the school board had not resorted to underhanded measures using a loophole to get this tax increase passed with 55% approval rather than the NORMAL 2/3.
What an outrage, and we definitely have to get that tax increase loophole closed. TAX INCREASES require 2/3s voter approval, to make it hard to increase taxes. The school board exploited loopholes, since they knew that a fourth bond measure for long term expansion in 12 years was three bond measures too many. That works out to a tax increase every 3 years for so called "Long Term" planning. These clowns can't even get a school calendar coordinated, and we trust them to plan and use money properly? I don't think so.
Posted by Different Take, a resident of another community, on Feb 7, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Actually the Sequoia Union High School District has done a good job of transforming the schools, and I feel they have managed the money well when it has come to building projects. However, it does seem a bit excessive to have four bond measures so close together when no other district has had more than two. The 55% provision that nearly every district chooses to do is pretty easy to pass.
Right now all four high schools and the district office are state of the art in comparison to comparable districts and with this bond money the improvements will probably put the schools as some of the best in the state. I really can't imagine how much more they'll need to do after classroom remodels, new classrooms, second gyms, new pools, synthetic track/fields, new/renovated theatres, etc...
Nobody can say they're not sending their kids to SUHSD schools becaues of the facilities. They're pretty much top notch.
I do hope this it, though, as far as bond measures because my property taxes have climbed significantly and this could be a case where they kill the golden goose that lays the egg as people start an effort to repeal the 55% provision.
Posted by objective view, a resident of another community, on Feb 10, 2008 at 11:48 pm
> I really can't imagine how much more they'll need to do
> after classroom remodels, new classrooms, second gyms,
> new pools, synthetic track/fields, new/renovated theatres, etc...
One can easily imagine: graduation rates and college readiness which has so little to do with gyms, pools, synthetic track and theaters.
was the Almanac editorial correct on Jan 23 that the cost is now $32.5M for the M-A theater? if the square footage is 31,000 as mentioned on Nov 21, then the price is surging past $1040 per square foot, not the $600 mentioned in the approving editorial. How many additional teachers could one obtain, just on the interest on $32.5 M?