Sequoia Union High School District considers new bond measure

Polling conducted by the district in partnership with consulting firm TBWBH Props and Measures shows initial support for a general bond measure is about 67%. The poll also found support for all potential projects to be more than 70% and remained steady at around 66% at the end of the survey respondents were informed of the costs and types of projects the bond would fund.

Five previous district bond measures have been approved since 1996 with about 66% of the vote or more, according to a report from Makiko Sato with Isom Advisors. In total, the district has issued more than $633 million in bonds with the most recent measure of $265 million passing in 2014.

During an update on the district’s current outstanding general obligation bond balance of $463 million, Sato said the district is in good credit standing and recently locked in $7.6 million in savings this year after refinancing.

“It sounds like passing bonds would be an incredibly good investment for the community,” Trustee Chris Thomsen said.

As for what to ask of taxpayers this go around, polling showed respondents were amenable to a request of $14 for every $100,000 of assessed property value. But when discussing the issue during a meeting earlier this month, and again Wednesday, trustees shared interest in increasing the ask up to $19.

Taxpayers paid about $23 for every $100,000 assessed value in the last cycle, down from the $43 charged in fiscal year 2015-16 to cover the district’s bond obligations. The district’s Facilities Master Plan is also being finalized, which could influence the rate the district asks of taxpayers.

Before making the change, though, Crystal Leach, associate superintendent of Administrative Services, said she would like to conduct an additional survey to gauge whether the increase would be accepted by voters.

The issue was previously polled 10 months ago but since then, Leach noted the market has changed and the increase would be a substantial one, a suggestion with which trustees agreed.

“If we’re considering a different number than we polled and at 30% potentially higher than we polled, that seems meaningful. And also, economic conditions have changed and we may get a sense whether or not that impacts us,” Trustee Alan Sarver said.

Trustees also discussed what the bond funds should cover with Trustee Richard Ginn arguing in favor of adding language into the bond measure resolution indicating the district could use the dollars to purchase land. Leach said the district currently has the capacity within its capital fund to purchase additional land and said she would like to look at polling data before confirming whether the item should be added to the list of potential projects.

Previous bond funds have been used to acquire two pieces of land without controversy, noted Jared Boigon, a partner at TBWBH. Given that the bond measure would be focused on supporting modernization efforts, Boigon suggested future land acquisition could be added to a longer potential project list without jeopardizing the bond.

“It’s a fair question to raise because school districts and land use can be tricky and particularly in the Peninsula where land is in high demand,” Boigon said. “Land use issues can be controversial very quickly. That is something to be aware of. … I haven’t heard that about you so my sense is that it’s not particularly controversial.”

Thomsen and Ginn also shared concerns for using bond dollars to purchase computers, which they argued should be considered an operating expense rather than a capital expense given that technological advances have made it so every student could potentially have a computer at home like a textbook.

“Most business practices would not allow those things to be long-term capitalized,” Thomsen said.

Janet Mueller, legal counsel with DWK, the firm helping the district draft its measure, said long-term bonds cannot be used to make short-term purchases but financial planning could be done so that computer purchases outlive the bond.

Leach said she would like to further discuss what qualifies as infrastructure with Mueller before presenting a final draft of the resolution and list of potential projects. An updated resolution will be presented to the board during its next meeting Aug. 3, when trustees are expected to make a final decision on whether to place the bond measure on the November ballot.

sierra@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106