In anticipation of placing a bond measure on the 2026 ballot, the San Mateo-Foster City School District has drafted a comprehensive assessment of every need at each of the 22 school campuses.
A draft of the district’s Facilities Master Plan was presented to the Board of Trustees Dec. 11, and showed that immediate needs are valued at approximately $498 million, and total needs at over $1.1 billion.
“In order to have learning environments that keep students inspired, you have to invest in updating your campuses on an ongoing basis,” Superintendent Diego Ochoa said.
The draft document includes improvements to be made within the next five years, but the district considers improvements in a 10-year scope, Amy Ruffo, director of Facilities and Construction, said. The document also will allow the district to be eligible for state funding up to $55 million, she said.
Bond measures were passed by voters in 2010, 2013 and 2020, most recently Measure T for $409 million. While the funds have addressed many facility improvement projects, “resource limitations have not allowed the district to address the substantial, ongoing facilities needs comprehensively,” according to the master plan.
Investing in workforce housing, providing between 80 and 100 units, is to be considered in the facilities master plan. Considered a priority, the district is estimating nearly $100 million needed to be dedicated toward developing the housing facility at a district-owned site.
Needs across campus include replacing leaky roofs and old windows, updating classrooms and labs for science, technology, engineering and math, and restoring shop classes and career technical education with modern equipment. Nearly every campus also needs updated fire alarm systems, Ruffo said, and upgrades to general safety, security and accessibility facilities.
Beyond districtwide improvements needed, feedback collected at each school as site assessments has made the facilities master plan “extremely thorough,” Ochoa said.
“All of our school district sites have such unique, such vocal and such informed parents, staff and community groups,” Ochoa said.
Recommended for you
A focus school will be Bayside Academy, which was described by Ochoa and multiple trustees as needing a lot of attention. The school has an identified total needs costing more than $65.5 million, and nearly $30 million as immediate priorities.
A significant portion of that includes developing a new building for science, music and library uses and modernizing existing science classrooms, according to the draft plan,
“You can do a lot at one campus … these priorities lists are really important because it gives us a roadmap of where we should start,” Ochoa said. “It needs a lot of work, it’s really far behind so many other schools in the district.”
The needs identified at Borel Middle School are also costly. Prioritized projects are estimated to cost approximately $49 million, as the school is in need of new classrooms, a library and administration office.
Lead Elementary School, which is slated to be named Cottage Grove Elementary School in the new school year, is also estimated to need about $40 million worth of upgrades to its campus, most of which is maintenance costs and upgrades to its existing facilities. The site is in need of a new library, as well.
A major upgrade at Audubon Elementary School and San Mateo Park Elementary School is needed to address the slew of windowless classrooms at each campus. This project alone is estimated to cost approximately $21.7 million at Audubon and $28.5 million at San Mateo Park.
At Abbott Middle School, a new career technical education facility with shop space and classrooms is estimated to cost $6.6 million.
The facilities master plan will return to the Board of Trustees for final approval in January. The document will inform outreach the district will employ as it tries to garner voter support for a $498 million bond measure in 2026.
Folks, don’t fall for the sob stories. The bottom line is that the school district needs more of your hard-earned money to pay for ever-increasing public education union salaries, pensions, and benefits. Let’s find out what the bond measures passed by voters in 2010, 2013, and 2020, most recently for $409 million have been used for. Until there’s a breakdown and evidence of fiscal management, vote NO. And why are we paying for workforce housing? How will we evict them if they leave service? We know how difficult it is now to evict tenants…
Here are the latest details on the Measure X and T construction projects along with budget vs actuals. There are bond oversight committees for each measure as well.
Redwood City has a bond oversight committee as well. It's run by the superintendent, the lawyer of RCSD and school board trustees and members of RCEF - which is also steered by the superintendent.
Basically it is illegal on so many levels, but the Superintendent of all schools at the San Mateo Board of Education Nancy Magee and her trustees do not want to step in and fix this.
Allison - these committee members are picked by the School Board. They are the foxes guarding the henhouse. Not only that, they have no veto rights at all, and are just a rubber stamp as in a "check the box" requirement.
Thanks for the link to the slide show, AlisonProctor, but these numbers provide only an overview. I find it improbable (perhaps statistically impossible) that for almost all Completed Projects, the Budget vs. Commitments vs. Expenditures numbers is exactly the same, down to the dollar amount. It’s almost as if budgeted and commitment numbers were back-filled based on expenditures. (I’ve never heard of budgeting down to the exact dollar for budgeted amounts.) This slideshow does nothing to alleviate concerns that our taxpayer money has been spent wisely or in a fiscally responsible manner. In fact, it brings up questions as to whether the numbers presented are valid. Where’s the breakdown of labor vs. supplies vs. administrative costs, etc.?
And it appears my friends, Dirk and eGerd have noted (hey Dirk and eGerd-Merry Christmas) who bond oversight committees consist of. Can you verify? And can you verify these folks who are paid with taxpayer funds - perhaps the funds allocated for these bond measures? Regardless, I’d continue recommending voting NO on any tax proposals taking more of our hard-earned money to pay ever-increasing union wages, pensions, and benefits. BTW, are we now on the hook for-ever for pensions and benefits of oversight committee participants?
Terrence is right! We have been through this before. Besides, there are other ways to pay for workforce housing other than bonds. The school board is looking for the easy way out first....to extract more money from the public. Enough!. Vote NO on all bonds and tax increases.
And Lou is right! There are other ways but the bigger question is whether we need workforce housing for public educators? Or does this workforce housing apply to administrators, or janitors, or gardeners, or aides, or…? Regardless, Merry Christmas, Lou! Always great to read your contributions.
Magnet programs were invented to desegregate school districts. Devious board trustees have used magnet schools to segregate them.
Two school districts (SMFCSD and RCSD) in this county have been particularly devious by deliberately segregating their schools.
If SMFCSD didn't have money why is this the only district in the county that runs not one, but TWO Montessori schools plus two Language Immersions schools on top of that.
"Montessori" or "(rich people)-language Immersion" clearly points to messed-up priorities.
These districts created private-school-type schools paid for with public funding. At the same time they are re-routing money from low-income neighborhood schools. Then they go to the public pointing to the schools that they themselves "underfunded" and are asking for money.
These schools have already fenced in their schools so the community is now excluded from using the playgrounds. Kids on bicycles could use the blacktops for practice, but no, these schools are shutting children out of what is supposed to be a safe space for them.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(9) comments
Folks, don’t fall for the sob stories. The bottom line is that the school district needs more of your hard-earned money to pay for ever-increasing public education union salaries, pensions, and benefits. Let’s find out what the bond measures passed by voters in 2010, 2013, and 2020, most recently for $409 million have been used for. Until there’s a breakdown and evidence of fiscal management, vote NO. And why are we paying for workforce housing? How will we evict them if they leave service? We know how difficult it is now to evict tenants…
Terence Y too many taxes proposed for 2026. People will just go down the list and vote NO on everything!
Here are the latest details on the Measure X and T construction projects along with budget vs actuals. There are bond oversight committees for each measure as well.
https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1761666669/smfcsdnet/w2bhwehn8avwyckn21yq/MeasureXTOct2025Update.pdf
Redwood City has a bond oversight committee as well. It's run by the superintendent, the lawyer of RCSD and school board trustees and members of RCEF - which is also steered by the superintendent.
Basically it is illegal on so many levels, but the Superintendent of all schools at the San Mateo Board of Education Nancy Magee and her trustees do not want to step in and fix this.
... "you scratch my back and I scratch yours".
Allison - these committee members are picked by the School Board. They are the foxes guarding the henhouse. Not only that, they have no veto rights at all, and are just a rubber stamp as in a "check the box" requirement.
Thanks for the link to the slide show, AlisonProctor, but these numbers provide only an overview. I find it improbable (perhaps statistically impossible) that for almost all Completed Projects, the Budget vs. Commitments vs. Expenditures numbers is exactly the same, down to the dollar amount. It’s almost as if budgeted and commitment numbers were back-filled based on expenditures. (I’ve never heard of budgeting down to the exact dollar for budgeted amounts.) This slideshow does nothing to alleviate concerns that our taxpayer money has been spent wisely or in a fiscally responsible manner. In fact, it brings up questions as to whether the numbers presented are valid. Where’s the breakdown of labor vs. supplies vs. administrative costs, etc.?
And it appears my friends, Dirk and eGerd have noted (hey Dirk and eGerd-Merry Christmas) who bond oversight committees consist of. Can you verify? And can you verify these folks who are paid with taxpayer funds - perhaps the funds allocated for these bond measures? Regardless, I’d continue recommending voting NO on any tax proposals taking more of our hard-earned money to pay ever-increasing union wages, pensions, and benefits. BTW, are we now on the hook for-ever for pensions and benefits of oversight committee participants?
Terrence is right! We have been through this before. Besides, there are other ways to pay for workforce housing other than bonds. The school board is looking for the easy way out first....to extract more money from the public. Enough!. Vote NO on all bonds and tax increases.
And Lou is right! There are other ways but the bigger question is whether we need workforce housing for public educators? Or does this workforce housing apply to administrators, or janitors, or gardeners, or aides, or…? Regardless, Merry Christmas, Lou! Always great to read your contributions.
Magnet programs were invented to desegregate school districts. Devious board trustees have used magnet schools to segregate them.
Two school districts (SMFCSD and RCSD) in this county have been particularly devious by deliberately segregating their schools.
If SMFCSD didn't have money why is this the only district in the county that runs not one, but TWO Montessori schools plus two Language Immersions schools on top of that.
"Montessori" or "(rich people)-language Immersion" clearly points to messed-up priorities.
These districts created private-school-type schools paid for with public funding. At the same time they are re-routing money from low-income neighborhood schools. Then they go to the public pointing to the schools that they themselves "underfunded" and are asking for money.
These schools have already fenced in their schools so the community is now excluded from using the playgrounds. Kids on bicycles could use the blacktops for practice, but no, these schools are shutting children out of what is supposed to be a safe space for them.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.