California Proposition 1D, Bonds for Education Facilities (2006)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
California Proposition 1D or the Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2006 was on the November 7, 2006 ballot in California as a legislatively-referred bond act, where it was approved.

Proposition 1D authorized entering into $20.3 billion of spending on public school construction projects--$10.4 billion in principal and $9.9 billion in interest.

Election results

Proposition 1D
Approveda Yes 4,754,868 56.9%


In a 2011 report, the investigative journalism organization California Watch reported, "only two schools have been able to access a $200 million fund for upgrades."[1]

Text of measure


The ballot title was:

Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2006. Legislative Bond Act.


Proposition 1D 2006.PNG

The question on the ballot was:

"Should the state sell $10.4 billion in general obligation bonds to repair and upgrade public schools, including K-12, community colleges, and state colleges and universities?"


The official summary provided to describe Proposition 1D said:

  • This ten billion four hundred sixteen million dollar ($10,416,000,000) bond issue will provide needed funding to relieve public school overcrowding and to repair older schools.
  • It will improve earthquake safety and fund vocational educational facilities in public schools. Bond funds must be spent according to strict accountability measures.
  • Funds will also be used to repair and upgrade existing public college and university buildings and to build new classrooms to accommodate the growing student enrollment in the California Community Colleges, the University of California, and the California State University.
  • Appropriates money from the General Fund to pay off bonds.

Fiscal impact

See also: Fiscal impact statement

The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:

"State costs of about $20.3 billion to pay off both the principal ($10.4 billion) and interest ($9.9 billion) on the bonds. Payments of about $680 million per year."



Main proponents:

Arguments in favor

  • Reduces overcrowding
  • Updates Technology
  • Invests in the future generation
  • Increases Vocational training for non-college students
  • Part of the "Rebuild California" project that will improve California for future generations and provide the resources needed for the tremendous growth that the state continues to see.[2]



Main opponents:

  • William Saracino, Member, Editorial Board, California Political Review
  • Thomas N. Hudson, Executive Director, California Taxpayer Protection Committee[2]

Arguments against

  • Requires 50% matching funds from district, resulting in only wealthy districts receivingmoney
  • Proposition includes unnessary measures instead of proving the esscentials
  • At $10.4 billion, it is too costly

Campaign finance

Donors to the campaign for the measure:[3]

  • Yes on 1D: $11,453,455
  • Rebuilding California, Yes on Propositions 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D and 1E: $9,235,090
  • Californians for Higher Education/Yes on 1D: $1,520,835
  • Coalition for Adequate School Housing Issues CMTE/Yes on 1D: $1,038,101
  • Community College Facility Coalition Issues CMTE/Yes on 1D: $661,395
  • Citizens for Responsible Elections: $30,000
  • CMTE for California's Future: $29,500
  • Californians fr Accountability and Better Schools/Yes on 1D: $158
  • Total: $23,968,535

Path to the ballot

The California State Legislature voted to put Proposition 1D on the ballot via Assembly Bill 127 of the 2005–2006 Regular Session (Chapter 35, Statutes of 2006).

Votes in legislature to refer to ballot
Chamber Ayes Noes
Assembly 58 12
Senate 29 8

External links

Suggest a link

Additional reading: