Sequoia Union seeks support on new bond

Trustees had considered two other larger bond amounts — an $801 million bond measure with a tax rate of $19 per 100,000 of assessed property value and a middle option of $680.5 million with a $16 tax rate — but, recognizing existing financial uncertainty, ruled them out.

“It’s important to hit the most urgent needs and one of those is many aging classrooms that don’t have appropriate HVAC, which is an issue both with smoke and COVID. So we wanted to have good learning environments for students and prioritize that,” board Trustee Rich Ginn said.

Polling and surveys done by a consulting firm, TBWBH Props and Measures, found the lowest bond received strong support in the 70% range. The most expensive bond reached only about 55% after being challenged by one negative statement about the high cost of living in the Bay Area. Measure W would need support from at least 55% of voters to pass.

The funds couldn’t be used on programming or employee salaries, though, a sticking point for Chris Robell who is leading the opposition campaign against the measure and Redwood City School District’s Measure S.

Rather than funding a “wish list” of construction projects at a time when enrollment is dipping, Robell argued the district should only seek support for urgent improvements while prioritizing investments into areas known to enhance student outcomes.

“It’s about prioritizing. It’s not that it’s not important or you don’t want people to be comfortable,” Robell said, arguing that the district could find more economic solutions for remedying some concerns such as heating and cooling in classrooms. “You have to figure out, with a limited budget, what can be done and how much can a taxpayer absorb.”

Had the district pursued a parcel tax, which could be used on salaries and programming, Robell said he likely would have supported the measure. Instead, he said the district is irresponsibly asking voters to back an expensive bond during a time of economic instability.

Those taxes, he said, will be passed down to some of the area’s most vulnerable residents including seniors, people with disabilities and renters, given that, unlike parcel tax measures, bonds do not offer exemptions.

Robell has also asserted the district should provide voters with a fully fleshed-out taxation plan if they remained determined to fund their list of projects. He also said current interest rates are high, and so is the cost of borrowing through bonds.

Trustee Alan Sarver asserts the district has responsibly managed previous bonds and would continue to do so if voters approve Measure W.

“We’re going to begin the process at a high-interest rate level but we have a track record and we will maintain it to aggressively refinance every time a cost-saving opportunity presents itself,” Sarver said while also suggesting the economy has weathered more volatile storms in recent history. “It will end up being only temporary that rates will be particularly high and we’ll take advantage of every opportunity to refinance and bring those rates down over time.”

The most recent bond, Measure A, was approved in 2014 and allowed the district to take out $265 million of debt. All of those funds have now been spent, enabling the development of new classrooms, upgraded facilities and equipment and the installation of new heating and cooling systems and solar panels.

District officials argue additional work is still needed to help modernize aging facilities, some of which are more than 50 years old. More than $1.3 billion would be needed to cover the cost of all identified improvements in the district’s Facilities Master Plan after accounting for 30% in cost escalation, according to an incomplete comprehensive list.

The more conservative bond would still cover most of the cost of priority projects, including improvements to heating, cooling and ventilation systems, a key issue for the district that saw students and teachers suffer greatly during recent heat waves, Sarver said. According to the Facilities Master Plan, about $650 million would be needed to cover their list of top priority projects after accounting for 30% in cost escalation.

Robell noted the district will likely ask for more money down the road, a fact he said the district hasn’t been transparent about with voters. Officials have acknowledged additional borrowing would be necessary to fully fund their list of improvements during interviews and in public meetings but Robell argues campaign information should more clearly state the nearly $600 million ask is not the last.

“These are going to cost way more than what’s stated,” Robell said. “To me, because I like kids so much, I’m not going to vote for this. How much is the taxpayer going to bear in funding this and where is the triage?”

sierra@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106