School bonds might be on spring ballot

Beyond fixes and improvements, a Burlingame official said the bond may be needed to help build another school required to house new students, while a high school official said the tax could help pay for financing workforce housing.

Burlingame Elementary School District

Maggie MacIsaac, superintendent of the Burlingame Elementary School District, said officials were heartened by a poll of expected voters indicating support for a potential bond.

Survey results showed 66% of voters would support a bond taxing property owners $25 per $100,000 of assessed property value, while 70% of voters would support a bond taxing $19 per $100,000 of assessed value. Both surveys are well beyond the 55% threshold required for the tax to pass.

MacIsaac characterized the results as very positive for the district, which is one of the few locally with a continuously growing student population — generating capacity concerns among officials.

“With the growth plans that the city has, they are going to need another school on that end of town,” said MacIsaac, referencing plans by Burlingame city officials to develop a new neighborhood near Rollins Road on the north end of town.

Even before officials can take on such a substantial project, MacIsaac said more money will be needed to build classrooms accommodating the additional students coming to the district.

Rather than continuing to add to buildings, some of which are more than 100 years old, MacIsaac said officials will likely need to construct new buildings on campuses.

According to a district report, there are nearly $300 million worth of projects in the facilities master plan which need to be addressed and all the existing bond funding has been allocated to ongoing projects. In 2016, 74% of Burlingame voters approved Measure M, a $56 million bond largely designed to update and renovate aging campuses. That measure costs $22 per $100,000 of assessed property value.

MacIsaac also suggested tax money could also pay toward installation of security cameras, which officials are interested in purchasing but cannot afford with the district’s existing limited budget.

For her part, MacIsaac said officials are interested in floating the measure to spring ballot. Noting the desire of San Mateo Union High School District officials in going to voters for a bond at the same time, MacIsaac downplayed concerns that the two school systems would split the vote of education supporters.

“I don’t see any problem with it,” said MacIsaac.

San Mateo Union High School District

Greg Land, president of the San Mateo Union High School District school board, said he plans to vote during a meeting Thursday, Nov. 14, in favor of the proposal to float a bond to the spring ballot as well.

The high school district’s proposal would tax property owners $15.55 per $100,000 of assessed land value in the effort to generate about $385 million to improve district facilities.

Land said priority projects include security cameras, retrofitting aging campuses, updating learning facilities and other fixes across the district. A portion of the tax money could also be paid toward advancing a proposal to build housing for teachers, and revenue paid from the sale of the former Crestmoor campus in San Bruno could backfill the effort, said Land.

He balanced that perspective by noting though that workforce housing is not a priority for high school officials, who are more interested in assuring campuses are modernized and safe for students.

“It’s important to consider the safety issues,” said Land. “We are making that a priority and I think that’s critical.”

For his part, Land also said he is also comfortable going out on the same ballots as Burlingame officials for another bond measure, noting the high school district’s need for additional revenue since last floating a similar tax 10 years ago.

“Our data has showed we are pretty secure on all fronts,” he said.

austin@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 105