School bond elections in California

School bonds & taxes
Bond elections
2013 • 2012 • 2011 • 2010 2009 • 2008 All years and states
Property tax elections
2013 • 2012 • 2011 • 2010 2009 • 2008 All years and states
How voting works
Other
State comparisons County evaluations Approval rates

California school bond elections are local ballot measures that ask voters to decide on whether the school district that is sponsoring the measure should be allowed to issue bonds, and incur the additional indebtedness that bonds bring with them.

All public school district in California are entitled to bond issues on the local ballot.

California also has a statewide school building program known as the School Facilities Grant Program which is supported by statewide bond measures such as Proposition 1D in 2006. Statewide bond measures require a simple majority to pass.

Local school districts can also issue school construction bonds and levy property taxes to pay for them, as long as the voters in the district approve.

Approval rates

About two-thirds of local school bond proposals in California were approved in the decade that runs from 1998-2008.

Prior to 2001, districts needed two-thirds approval to pass local general obligation bond measures. More than 40% of local school bond ballot questions failed. In November 2000, California voters passed Proposition 39. Proposition 39 reduced the supermajority needed to pass a bond issue ballot question from 67% to 55%. Proposition 39 also imposed some restrictions on the allowable amount of the bond and included some accountability requirements. Since the passage of Proposition 39, districts have had the choice of whether to seek two-thirds or 55% approval. 80% of local school bond ballots that rely on the 55% approval have succeeded.

Donations from underwriters

"The Bond Buyer" published a study in 2012 that indicated "a nearly perfect correlation between broker-dealer contributions to California school bond efforts in 2010 and their underwriting subsequent bond sales." The group said, "Such contributions are not illegal, but they raise questions for some that regulations may need to be updated to prevent 'pay-to-play' conflicts of interest."

According to the study, "underwriters contributed more than $700,000 to 41, or 67%" of the state's 2010 local bond elections. It goes on to say, "The California school bond measures linked to broker-dealer contributions approved in 2010 resulted in an estimated $3.85 billion of bond authorizations, resulting in around $1.2 billion of debt issued. Every time but once, the records showed, when a broker-dealer contributed to a bond referendum that passed, it ended up as lead manager or co-manager."

"Capital Appreciation Bonds"

An investigative report published in August 2012 by the Voice of San Diego revealed that at least one school district -- Poway Unified in San Diego County -- used a form of financing called a "Capital Appreciation Bond" that will result in the district having to pay back about $1 billion for a loan of about $105 million.

When the district's voters approved Proposition C in February 2008, they were told in the official voter guide that their taxes would not go up if they voted "yes" on the proposed borrowing. However, unbeknownst to voters, taxes will only be held down for 20 years. After that, for another 20 years, taxes will increase dramatically. This is because the school district arranged a loan repayment schedule where for the first 20 years, no loan payments will be made at all. All the deferred interest from the first 20 years of the loan will be added back to the principal of the loan and it will all start coming due in 20 years.

"In 2008, voters had given the district permission to borrow more money to finish its modernization, and they had received a big promise from the elected school board in return: No tax increases.

Without increasing taxes, the district couldn’t afford to borrow money in the conventional way. So, instead of borrowing from investors over 20 or 30 years and paying the debt down each year, like a mortgage, the district got creative.

With advice from an Orange County financial consultant, the district borrowed the money over 40 years in a controversial loan called a capital appreciation bond. The key point for the district: It won’t make any payments on the debt for 20 years.

And that means the district’s debt will keep getting bigger and bigger as interest on the loan piles up.

The bottom line: For borrowing $105 million in 2011, taxpayers will end up paying investors more than $981 million by 2051, or almost 10 times what the district borrowed. That’s wildly more expensive than a typical school bond, in which a district pays back two or maybe three times what it borrowed."

Elections

2012

2012 school bond question election overview
Status	Number	Win/Loss %	Dollars	Dollar %
a Approved	113	80.71%	-	-
d Defeated	27	19.29%	-	-
Totals:	140	100%	--	100%

November 6:

See also: November 6, 2012 ballot measure elections

106 public school bond propositions were on the November 6, 2012 ballot in 33 counties.

They ranged from a low of a $830,000 (Pacific Elementary, Measure M in Santa Cruz County) to a high of $2.8 billion (San Diego Unified, Proposition Z in San Diego County).

Eight of the 106 measures were for community colleges.

Each measure required a 55% supermajority vote for approval.

Measure	County	Amount	Outcome
Alum Rock Union, Measure J	Santa Clara	$125,000,000	a
Alvord Unified, Measure W	Riverside	$79,000,000	a
Antioch Union High, Measure C	Shasta	$12,300,000	a
Antioch High, Measure B	Contra Costa	$56,500,000	a
Arcata Elementary, Measure F	Humboldt	$7,000,000	a
Bellflower Unified, Measure BB	Los Angeles	$79,000,000	a
Brawley Elementary, Measure S	Imperial	$7,500,000	a
Burlingame Elementary, Measure D	San Mateo	$56,000,000	a
Butteville Union, Measure R	Siskiyou	$3,500,000	d
Cajon Valley Union, Measure C	San Diego	$88,400,000	a
Castaic Union Elementary, Measure QS	Los Angeles	$51,000,000	a
Caruthers Unified, Measure C	Fresno	$12,000,000	a
Cerritos Community College, Measure G	Los Angeles	$350,000,000	a
Chaffey Joint Union High, Measure P	San Bernardino	$848,000,000	a
Chico Unified, Measure E	Butte	$78,000,000	a
Chula Vista Elementary, Measure E	San Diego	$90,000,000	a
Coachella Valley Unified, Measure X	Riverside/Imperial	$41,000,000	a
Coast Community College, Measure M	Orange	$698,000,000	a
College School District, Measure K	Santa Barbara	$12,000,000	d
Covina-Valley Unified, Measure CC	Los Angeles	$129,000,000	a
Dehesa Schools, Measure D	San Diego	$3,000,000	a
Del Mar Union, Proposition CC	San Diego	$76,800,000	d
Delhi Unified, Measure E	Merced	$8,000,000	a
Earlimart Schools, Measure H	Tulare	$3,600,000	a
East Side Union High, Measure I	Santa Clara	$120,000,000	a
El Camino Community College, Measure E	Los Angeles	$350,000,000	a
Elk Hills, Measure O	Kern	$6,200,000	d
Escalon Unified, Measure B	San Joaquin	$19,500,000	a
Folsom Cordova Unified, Measure P	Sacramento	$68,000,000	a
Fortuna Union, Measure D	Humboldt	$10,000,000	a
Fountain Valley, Measure N	Orange	$23,500,000	d
Gravenstein Union, Measure M	Sonoma	$6,000,000	a
Gridley Unified, Measure G	Butte	$11,000,000	d
Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College, Measure V	San Diego	$398,000,000	a
Hemet Unified, Measure U	Riverside	$49,000,000	a
Hueneme Elementary, Measure T	Ventura	$19,600,000	a
Inglewood Unified, Measure GG	Los Angeles	$90,000,000	a
Jefferson Elementary, Measure I	San Mateo	$67,500,000	a
Jefferson Union High, Measure E	San Mateo	$41,900,000	a
Kings Canyon Unified, Measure K	Fresno/Tulare	$40,000,000	a
Knightsen Elementary, Measure H	Contra Costa	$3,000,000	d
La Habra City Schools, Measure O	Orange	$31,000,000	a
Lancaster Elementary, Measure L	Los Angeles	$63,000,000	a
Lindsay Unified, Measure L	Tulare	$16,000,000	a
Little Lake City, Measure EE	Los Angeles	$18,000,000	a
Lynwood Unified, Measure K	Los Angeles	$93,000,000	a'
McFarland Unified, Measure M	Kern	$25,000,000	a
Mendota Unified, Measure M	Fresno	$19,000,000	a
MiraCosta Community College, Proposition EE	San Diego	$497,000,000	d
Morgan Hill, Measure G	Santa Clara	$198,250,000	a
Mount Pleasant Schools, Measure L	Santa Clara	$25,000,000	a
Mountain Empire Unified, Measure G	San Diego	$30,800,000	d
Nuview Union, Measure V	Riverside	$4,000,000	a
Oakland Unified, Measure J	Alameda	$475,000,000	a
Ocean View Schools, Measure P	Orange	$198,000,000	d
Ocean View Schools, Measure P	Ventura	$4,200,000	a
Oxnard Schools, Measure R	Ventura	$90,000,000	a
Pacific Elementary, Measure M	Santa Cruz	$830,000	a
Pajaro Valley Unified, Measure L	Santa Cruz/Monterey	$150,000,000	a
Palmdale Elementary, Measure DD	Los Angeles	$220,000,000	a
Panama-Buena Vista Union, Measure P	Kern	$147,000,000	a
Perris Union High	Riverside	$153,420,000	a
Porterville Unified, Measure J	Tulare	$90,000,000	d
Ramona Unified, Measure R	San Diego	$66,000,000	d
Rancho Santiago Community College, Measure Q	Orange	$198,000,000	a
Redondo Beach Unified, Measure Q	Los Angeles	$63,000,000	a
Ripon Unified, Measure G	San Joaquin	$25,236,190	a
Roseland Schools, Measure N	Sonoma	$7,000,000	a
Rowland Unified, Measure R	Los Angeles	$158,800,000	a
Sacramento City Unified, Measure Q	Sacramento	$346,000,000	a
Sacramento City Unified, Measure R	Sacramento	$68,000,000	a
San Bernardino City Unified, Measure N	San Bernardino	$250,000,000	a
San Carlos Elementary	San Mateo	$72,000,000	a
San Diego Unified, Proposition Z	San Diego	$2,800,000,000	a
San Dieguito Union High, Proposition AA	San Diego	$449,000,000	a
San Jose Unified, Measure H	Santa Clara	$290,000,000	a
San Juan Unified, Measure N	Sacramento	$350,000,000	a
San Ramon Valley, Measure D	Contra Costa	$260,000,000	a
Sanger Unified, Measure S	Fresno	$50,000,000	a
Santa Monica-Malibu Unified, Measure ES	Los Angeles	$385,000,000	a
Santa Ynez Valley Union High, Measure L	Santa Barbara	$19,840,000	d
Solano Community College	Solano/Yolo	$348,000,000	a
Soledad Unified, Measure C	Monterey	$40,000,000	a
Somis Union, Measure S	Ventura	$9,000,000	a
Sonora Union High, Measure J	Tuolumne	$23,000,000	a
South Bay Union, Measure Y	San Diego	$26,000,000	a
Spreckels Union, Measure B	Monterey	$7,000,000	a
St. Helena Unified, Measure C	Napa	$30,000,000	a
Standard School, Measure Q	Kern	$11,200,000	a
Stockton Unified, Measure E	San Joaquin	$156,000,000	a
Summerville Union High, Measure H	Tuolumne	$8,000,000	a
Temecula Valley Unified, Measure Y	Riverside	$165,000,000	a
Temple City Unified, Measure S	Los Angeles	$128,800,000	a
Templeton Unified, Measure H	San Luis Obispo	$35,000,000	a
Tustin Unified, Measure S	Orange	$135,000,000	a
Visalia Unified, Measure E	Tulare	$60,100,000	a
Washington Unified, Measure W	Fresno	$22,000,000	a
Weaver Union, Measure G	Merced	$9,000,000	a
West Contra Costa Unified, Measure E	Contra Costa	$360,000,000	a
West Hills Community College, Measure L	Fresno/Kings	$12,655,000	a
Westside Union Elementary, Measure WR	Los Angeles	$18,510,000	a
Wheatland Union, Measure U	Yuba	$9,000,000	a
Whittier City Elementary, Measure Z	Los Angeles	$55,000,000	a
Willows Unified, Measure P	Glenn	$14,700,000	d
Wilmar Union, Measure P	Sonoma	$4,000,000	a
Yucaipa-Calimesa Joint Unified, Measure O	Riverside/San Bernardino	$98,000,000	d

June 5:

See also: June 5, 2012 ballot measure elections

34 public school bond propositions were on the June 5, 2012 ballot. Twenty-five (or 73.5%) of the bond proposals were approved, and nine (or 26.5%) were defeated.

They ranged from a low of $2.2 million (Trinidad Union, Measure W in Humboldt County) to a high of $350 million (West Valley-Mission Community College District bond proposition, Measure C in Santa Clara County and Santa Cruz County).

Each measure required a 55% supermajority vote for approval.

Measure	County	Amount	Outcome
Alpine Union, Proposition H	San Diego	$11,995,000	d
Antioch Unified, Measure J	Contra Costa	$59,500,000	d
Biggs Unified, Measure B	Butte	$6,000,000	d
Brea-Olinda Unified, Measure E	Orange	$54,000,000	d
Buellton Union, Measure V	Santa Barbara	$3,200,000	a
Cabrillo Unified, Measure S	San Mateo	$81,000,000	a
Charter Oak Unified, Measure CO	Los Angeles	$47,000,000	a
Clovis Unified, Measure A	Fresno	$298,000,000	a
Corcoran Joint Unified, Measure V	Kings	$9,000,000	d
Cupertino Union, Measure H	Santa Clara	$200,000,000	a
Dublin Unified, Measure E	Alameda	$99,000,000	a
Gridley Unified, Measure C	Butte	$11,000,000	d
Gridley Elementary, Measure D	Butte	$2,500,000	a
Healdsburg Unified, Measure E	Sonoma	$35,000,000	a
Guerneville, Measure F	Sonoma	$6,000,000	a
Jurupa Unified, Measure M	Riverside	$125,000,000	d
Lincoln Unified, Measure A	San Joaquin	$48,500,000	a
Milpitas Unified, Measure E	Santa Clara	$95,000,000	a
Mountain Empire, Proposition G	San Diego	$30,800,000	d
Mountain View Whisman, Measure G	Santa Clara	$198,000,000	a
Norris School District, Measure B	Kern	$149,000,000	a
Old Adobe Union, Measure G	Sonoma	$26,000,000	a
Pollock Pines Elementary, Measure K	El Dorado	$9,000,000	a
Reef-Sunset Unified, Measure A	Kings	$10,800,000	a
Savanna Elementary, Measure G	Orange	$28,750,000	a
Sebastopol Union, Measure H	Sonoma	$9,000,000	a
Sierra Unified, Measure O	Fresno	$5,400,000	d
Southern Trinity Unified, Measure V	Humboldt	$2,300,000	a
Sulphur Springs Union Elementary, Measure CK	Los Angeles	$72,000,000	a
Taft City School, Measure C	Kern	$23,600,000	a
Trindad Union, Measure W	Humboldt	$2,200,000	a
Val Verde Unified, Measure L	Riverside	$178,000,000	a
West Valley-Mission Community College, Measure C	Santa Clara/Santa Cruz	$350,000,000	a
Wright, Measure I	Sonoma	$14,000,000	a

2011

2011 school bond question election overview
Status	Number	Win/Loss %	Dollars	Dollar %
a Approved	7	70%	$981,100,000.00	41.34%
d Defeated	3	30%	$1,392,000,000	58.66%
Totals:	10	100%	$2,373,100,000	100%

November 8:

a Bradley Union School District bond proposition, Measure T
a Larkspur School District bond proposition, Measure A
a Millbrae School District bond proposition, Measure N
a Newark Unified School District bond proposition, Measure G
a Newhall School District bond proposition, Measure E
d San Bruno Park School District bond proposition, Measure O
a San Francisco Unified School District bond, Proposition A
d San Mateo Community College District bond proposition, Measure H

April 5:

a Glendale Unified School District bond proposition, Measure S

March 8:

d Santa Clara Unified School District bond proposition, Measure A

2010

See also: California school district bond elections in 2010

2010 school bond question election overview
Status	Number	Win/Loss %	Dollars	Dollar %
a Approved	61	73.5%	$5,053,250,000	89.75%
d Defeated	22	26.5%	$576,950,000	10.25%
Totals:	83	100%	$5,630,200,000	100%

June 8:

Measure	County	Amount	Outcome
Anderson Valley Unified, Measure A	Mendocino	$15,250,000	a
Arcohe Union, Measure A	Sacramento	$3,900,000	d
Big Pine, Measure A	Inyo	$4,100,000	a
Blue Lake Elementary, Measure K	Humboldt	$2,000,000	a
Calipatria Unified, Measure I	Imperial	$25,000,000	d
Campbell Union Elementary, Measure G	Santa Clara	$150,000,000	a
Corcoran Unified, Measure Q	Kings/Tulare	$24,700,000	d
Garden Grove Unified, Measure A	Orange	$250,000,000	a
Greenfield Union, Measure L	Monterey	$8,300,000	a
Hope School, Measure L	Santa Barbara	$8,000,000	a
Los Gatos Union, Measure E	Santa Clara	$30,900,000	a
Lucerne Valley Unified, Measure S	San Bernardino	$7,950,000	d
Lynwood Unified, Measure AA	Los Angeles	$37,400,000	d
Mark West Union, Measure C	Sonoma	$14,000,000	a
Mountain View-Los Altos Union, Measure A	Santa Clara	$41,300,000	a
Mt. Diablo Unified, Measure C	Contra Costa	$348,000,000	a
Rohnerville, Measure M	Humboldt	$5,000,000	a
Southern Humboldt Unified, Measure L	Humboldt/Mendocino	$25,200,000	a
West Contra Costa Unified, Measure D	Contra Costa	$380,000,000	a
Willits Unified, Measure B	Mendocino	$43,000,000	a

November 2:

Measure	County	Amount	Outcome
Anaheim G	Orange	$169,300,000	a
Aromas-San Juan Z	Monterey/Santa Cruz	$16,100,000	a
Atascadero I-10	San Luis Obispo	$117,000,000	a
Baker Valley D	San Bernardino	$3,200,000	d
Belmont-Redwood I & N	San Mateo	$60,000,000	a (both)
Bennett Valley J	Sonoma	$10,600,000	a
Berkeley I	Alameda	$210,000,000	a
Calistoga A	Sonoma/Napa	$42,000,000	a
Centinela Valley CV	Los Angeles	$98,000,000	a
Claremont CL	Los Angeles	$95,000,000	d
Cloverdale G	Sonoma	$17,000,000	a
Coalinga-Huron E	Monterey/Fresno	$16,100,000	a
Cutler-Orosi T	Fresno/Tulare	$15,000,000	d
Dehasa M	San Diego	$5,500,000	a
Dixon D	Solano	$32,000,000	d
Duarte E	Los Angeles	$62,000,000	a
El Rancho EE	Los Angeles	$52,000,000	a
Emery Unified J	Alameda	$95,000,000	a
Encinatas Union P	San Diego	$44,200,000	a
Fairfax C	Kern	$24,800,000	a
Forestville Union K	Sonoma	$5,100,000	a
Franklin-McKinley J	Santa Clara	$50,000,000	a
Fresno Unified Q	Fresno	$280,000,000	a
Hamilton Unified O	Glenn	$5,400,000	d
Hughson Unified H	Stanislaus	$21,000,000	d
Imperial Community College J	Imperial	$80,000,000	a
Jefferson J	San Joaquin	$35,400,000	a
Julian Union L	San Diego	$2,100,000	a
Junction Elementary C	Shasta	$3,100,000	d
Knightsen Elementary N	Contra Costa	$5,000,000	d
Lynwood Unified L	Los Angeles	$45,000,000	d
Magnolia I	Orange	$16,300,000	a
Martinez Unified K	Contra Costa	$45,000,000	a
Monterey Peninsula P	Monterey	$110,000,000	a
Moreland Elementary K	Santa Clara	$55,000,000	a
Mt. San Jacinto Community College U	Riverside	$47,000,000	d
Northern Humboldt Union Q	Humboldt	$25,800,000	a
Ohlone Community College G	Alameda	$349,000,000	a
Piner-Olivet L	Sonoma	$20,000,000	a
Pittsburg Unified L	Contra Costa	$100,000,000	a
Rialto Unified Y	San Bernardino	$98,000,000	a
Ross Valley A	Marin	$41,000,000	a
Saint Helena Unified B	Napa	$30,000,000	a
San Jose City College G	Santa Clara	$268,000,000	a
San Leandro M	Alameda	$50,000,000	a
San Marcos Unified K	San Diego	$287,000,000	a
San Mateo Union O	San Mateo	$186,000,000	a
Santa Barbara Elementary R	Santa Barbara	$75,000,000	a
Santa Barbara High Q	Santa Barbara	$75,000,000	a
Santa Clara Unified H	Santa Clara	$81,100,000	a
Scott Valley Unified E	Siskiyou	$5,900,000	d
Sierra Plumas Joint C	Plumas/Sierra	$5,000,000	d
Sierra Unified S	Fresno	$9,600,000	d
Sonoma Valley Unified H	Sonoma	$40,000,000	a
Sonora Elementary H	Tuolumne	$3,800,000	d
South San Francisco Unified J	San Mateo	$162,000,000	a
Summerville Union High G	Tuolumne	$8,000,000	d
Twin Hill Union M	Sonoma	$11,000,000	a
Waterford Unified I	Stanislaus	$11,000,000	d
West Sonoma County Union I	Sonoma	$23,800,000	a
Western Placer Unified J	Placer	$163,000,000	d
Wiseburn AA	Los Angeles	$87,000,000	a

2009

2009 school bond question election overview
Status	Number	Win/Loss %	Dollars	Dollar %
a Approved	2	50%	$69,000,000	79.1%
d Defeated	2	50%	$18,235,000	20.9%
Totals:	4	100%	$87,235,000	100%

Measure	County	Amount	Outcome
Mill Valley, Measure C	Marin	$59,800,000	a
Shoreline Unified, Measure D	Marin, Sonoma	$9,290,000	a
Springville Union, Measure O	Tulare	$6,735,000	d
Springville Union, Measure L	Tulare	$11,500,000	d

2008

2008 school bond question election overview
Status	Number	Dollars	District %	Dollar %
a Approved	140		85.9%
d Defeated	23		14.1%
Totals:	163	-	100%	100%

November 4:

See California school district bond elections, November 2008

Ninety-six (96) school bond requests were on the November 4 ballot and eighty-seven of these were approved. Altogether, $22 billion in debt was incurred in the 87 school districts where bonds were approved. The most expensive bond request was the $7 billion sought and received by the Los Angeles Unified School District. The least expensive request was that of Cold Spring in Santa Barbara County, which sought and received $2.44 million.

Of the nine bond measures that failed, four received less than 50%. The other five that failed got between 50-54.9% of the vote, but failed because to pass, they needed a supermajority vote of at least 55%.

June 3:

See June 3, 2008 ballot measures in California

Forty-six school financing measures were on the June 3 ballot in California. This included:

• 33 school bond measures. 26 passed; 7 failed.
• 13 parcel tax measures. 7 passed; 6 failed.

February 5:

39 school districts asked for additional funding on February 5, 2008. 30 of the 39 passed with more than the 55% approval rate required by Prop 39 for their passage, for a total of approximately $3.9 billion in approved local school construction funds.

Eighteen of the thirty that passed would have failed to gain approval before Proposition 39 lowered the success threshold from two-thirds to 55%. The eighteen that passed because of the 55% threshold that would not have passed with a 2/3 threshold added $2.3 billion in new spending.

Measure	County	Amount	Outcome
Acton-Agua Dulce Unified School District, Measure V	Los Angeles	$46.20 million	d
Albany Unified School District, Measure E	Alameda	$10.00 million	a
Biggs Unified School District, Measure A	Butte	$4.28 million	d
Cajon Valley Union School District, Measure D	San Diego	$156.50 million	a
Caruthers Unified School District, Measure A	Fresno	$11.30 million	d
Caruthers Schools Facilities Improvement District 1, Measure B	Fresno	$2.80 million	d
Cold Spring School District, Measure R	Santa Barbara	$8.50 million	d
Dry Creek Joint School District, Measure E	Placer/Sacramento	$67.00 million	a
East Side Union High School District, Measure E	Santa Clara	$349.00 million	a
Enterprise Elementary School District, Measure A	Shasta	$34.00 million	a
Exeter Union Elementary School District bond proposition, Measure D (February 2008)	Tulare	$6.40 million	a
Geyserville Unified School District bond proposition, Measure A (February 2008)	Sonoma	$3.25 million	a
Lindsay Unified School District bond proposition, Measure B (February 2008)	Tulare	$20.70 million	a
Loomis Union School District bond proposition, Measure G (February 2008)	Placer	$17.70 million	d
Long Beach Community College District bond proposition, Measure E (February 2008)	Los Angeles	$440.00 million	a
Los Banos Unified School District bond proposition, Measure K (February 2008)	Merced	$44.00 million	a
McCabe Union Elementary School District bond proposition, Measure A (February 2008)	Imperial	$7.00 million	d
Menifee Union School District bond proposition, Measure B (February 2008)	Riverside	$31.46 million	a
Mojave Unified School District bond proposition, Measure A (February 2008)	Kern	$24.00 million	a
Napa Valley Community College District bond proposition, Measure L (February 2008)	Napa/Sonoma	$178.40 million	d
Orland Unified School District bond proposition, Measure K (February 2008)	Glenn	$21.90 million	a
Palm Springs Unified School District bond proposition, Measure E (February 2008)	Riverside	$516.00 million	a
Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified School District bond proposition, Measure A (February 2008)	Orange	$200.00 million	a
Poway Unified School District bond proposition, Measure C (February 2008)	San Diego	$179.00 million	a
Rancho Sante Fe School District bond proposition, Measure E (February 2008)	San Diego	$34.00 million	a
Redlands Unified School District bond proposition, Measure J (February 2008)	San Bernardino	$65.50 million	a
Redondo Beach Unified School District bond proposition, Measure C (February 2008)	Los Angeles	$145.00 million	a
Rio Bravo Greeley Union School District bond proposition, Measure B (February 2008)	Kern	$10.90 million	a
San Bernardino Community College District bond proposition, Measure M (February 2008)	San Bernardino	$500.00 million	a
San Gabriel Unified School District bond proposition, Measure A (February 2008)	Los Angeles	$65.00 million	a
San Lorenzo Valley Unified School District bond proposition, Measure O (February 2008)	Santa Cruz	$18.90 million	a
San Mateo-Foster City Schools bond proposition, Measure L (February 2008)	San Mateo	$175.00 million	a
Sequoia Union High School bond proposition, Measure J (February 2008)	San Mateo	$165.00 million	a
Stockton Unified School District bond proposition, Measure Q (February 2008)	San Joaquin	$464.50 million	a
Tipton Elementary School District bond proposition, Measure E (February 2008)	Tulare	$3.10 million	d
Upland Unified School District bond proposition, Measure K (February 2008)	San Bernardino	$103.00 million	a
Windsor Unified School District bond proposition, Measure B (February 2008)	Sonoma	$50.00 million	a
Woodlake High School District bond proposition, Measure C (February 2008)	Tulare	$4.50 million	a

$100 billion from 1996-2006

From 1996 to 2006, California voters approved nearly $100 billion in school construction bonds at the state and local level. This total increased with passage of California Proposition 1D (2006) by another $10.4 billion.

In another study, from 1986 through 1999, 450 school districts sponsored 731 general obligation bond elections. 54% of the 731 passed. In those years, two-thirds voter approval was required; this changed in 2000 to 55%.

Statewide bond measures

• California Proposition 1, Bonds for Schools (1949)
• California Proposition 24, Bonds for Public Schools (1952)
• California Proposition 2, Bonds for Public School Construction (1954)
• California Proposition 3, Bonds for Educational, Mental and Correctional Institutions (1956)
• California Proposition 2, Bonds for Schools for Handicapped Students (1956)
• California Proposition 3, Bonds for Correctional and Educational Facilities (1958)
• California Proposition 2, Bonds for School Facilities for Handicapped Students (1958)
• California Proposition 1, Bonds for Public Schools (June 1962)
• California Proposition 3, Bonds for Public School Construction (1964)
• California Proposition 1, Bonds for Public Schools (June 1966)
• California Proposition 2, Bonds for Public Education (June 1972)
• California Proposition 1, Bonds for Public Education (1974)
• California Proposition 1, Bonds for Public Schools (June 1976)
• California Proposition 4 (June 1976)
• California Proposition 1, State School Aid Bond Law (June 1980)
• California Proposition 1, School Construction Bonds (1982)
• California Proposition 26, Bonds for Public School Construction (1984)
• California Proposition 53, Green-Hughes School Building Lease-Purchase Bond Law (1986)
• California Proposition 75, Bonds for Public Schools (June 1988)
• California Proposition 79, Construction Bonds for Public Schools (1988)
• California Proposition 123, Public School Construction Bonds (1990)
• California Proposition 146, School Facilities Bond Act (1990)
• California Proposition 152, Bonds for Public Schools (1992)
• California Proposition 155, Bonds for Elementary Schools (1992)
• California Proposition 1B, School Facilities Bond Act (1994)
• California Proposition 203, Bonds for Educational Facilities (1996)
• California Proposition 1A, Bonds for Education (1998)
• California Proposition 47, Bonds for School Construction (2002)
• California Proposition 55, Bonds for Schools (March 2004)
• California Proposition 1D, Bonds for Education Facilities (2006)

Colleges

Year	Proposition	Amount	Outcome
1914	Proposition 11	$1,800,000	a
1962	Proposition 1A	$270,000,000	a
1964	Proposition 2	$380,000,000	a
1966	Proposition 2	$230,000,000	a
1968	Proposition 2	$65,000,000	a
1968	Proposition 3	$250,000,000	d
1970	Proposition 1	$246,300,000	d
1972	Proposition 1	$160,000,000	a
1972	Proposition 2	$155,900,000	a
1986	Proposition 56	$400,000,000	a
1988	Proposition 78	$600,000,000	a
1990	Proposition 121	$450,000,000	a
1990	Proposition 143	$450,000,000	d
1992	Proposition 153	$900,000,000	a
1994	Proposition 1C	$900,000,000	d

Libraries

Year	Proposition	Amount	Outcome
1988	Proposition 85	$75,000,000	a
2000	Proposition 14	$350,000,000	a
2006	Proposition 81	$600,000,000	d

Childcare

Year	Proposition	Amount	Outcome
1990	Proposition 151	$30,000,000	d

Process

Year	Proposition	Subject	Outcome
1966	Proposition 4	60% Supermajority to Approve School and Library Bonds	d
1993	Proposition 170	Simple Majority Vote Needed to Approve School Bonds	d

See also

Suggest a link

• Voting on school bond and tax measures
• Where to find information about local school bond and tax elections
• School bond election
• Approval rates of local school bond and tax elections

External links

• Cal Tax final election results for November 4
• California City Finance: Local Revenue Measures November 4, 2008
• Never-ending school bonds
• What is a bond?
• California's school finance system
• How to get a bond issue passed, from the National Clearinghouse on Educational Facilities (NCEF)
• February 5 approval of local school bonds
• Results of tax, bond and loan elections in California school districts, 1971-1972
• Local bond elections in California: Some vital statistics, January 2000.
• School districts, including many in valley, on thin ice in refinancing bond debt