Difference between revisions of "Charlotte School District Bond Measure (May 2010)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with 'There will be a '''Charlotte School District Bond Measure''' on the May 4 ballot in [[Eaton County, Michigan ballot measures|Eaton Cou…')
 
m (Text replace - "ategory:School bond," to "ategory:Local school bonds,")
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
There will be a '''Charlotte School District Bond Measure''' on the [[May 4, 2010 ballot measures in Michigan|May 4]] ballot in [[Eaton County, Michigan ballot measures|Eaton County]] for voters in the Charlotte school district.
+
There was a '''Charlotte School District Bond Measure''' on the [[May 4, 2010 ballot measures in Michigan|May 4]] ballot in [[Eaton County, Michigan ballot measures|Eaton County]] for voters in the Charlotte school district.
  
This measure seeks to create a bond in the amount of $23,600,000 in order to help with furnishing, remodeling and renovating various buildings in the school district.<ref>[https://treas-secure.state.mi.us/apps/findschoolbondelectinfo.asp?countyname=All&SelectYear=2010&electionresult=All&sortorder=ByElectionDate&Submit1=%A0Go%A0 ''Michigan State Treasure'' Qualified School Bond Elections]</ref>
+
This measure was '''defeated'''
 +
* '''YES''' 1,073
 +
* '''NO''' 1,161 {{defeated}}<ref>[http://www.electionmagic.com/archives/mi/2010/mayspec/E23results/E2300201sum.htm ''Eaton County Elections'', May Result Summary]</ref>
 +
 
 +
This measure sought to create a bond in the amount of $23,600,000 in order to help with furnishing, remodeling and renovating various buildings in the school district.<ref>[https://treas-secure.state.mi.us/apps/findschoolbondelectinfo.asp?countyname=All&SelectYear=2010&electionresult=All&sortorder=ByElectionDate&Submit1=%A0Go%A0 ''Michigan State Treasure'' Qualified School Bond Elections]</ref> This bond would have extended the current one, making it possible for needed upgrades to occur in the schools.  School officials cited old buildings and safety issues as the main concern and need for the further funding. The current $7.59 levy that is in place would have remained for a further eleven years if the measure had been approved. <ref>[http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20100426/NEWS05/4260326/Schools-pin-their-hopes-on-voters-to-OK-millages ''Lansing State Journal'', "Mid-Michigan schools pin hopes on voters to fund improvements," April 26, 2010]</ref> Public forums were held to educate local residents on the issue, hoping that by emphasizing the savings of around $73,000 annually for the district that residents would be more willing to vote in favor of the bond. This would have also allowed general fund money to be used elsewhere in the school district. School officials also emphasized the safety upgrades that are important to student safety.<ref>[http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20100423/CHAR01/4250494/1001/NEWS/Voters-decide-bond-May-4 ''Lansing State Journal'', "Voters decide bond May 4," April 23, 2010]</ref>
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
Line 8: Line 12:
 
{{Michigan counties}}
 
{{Michigan counties}}
 
{{Michigan}}
 
{{Michigan}}
[[category:Michigan 2010 local ballot measures]]
+
[[Category:Michigan 2010 local ballot measures]]
[[Category:School bond, Michigan, 2010]]
+
[[Category:Local school bonds, Michigan, 2010]]

Revision as of 20:46, 15 October 2012

There was a Charlotte School District Bond Measure on the May 4 ballot in Eaton County for voters in the Charlotte school district.

This measure was defeated

  • YES 1,073
  • NO 1,161 Defeatedd[1]

This measure sought to create a bond in the amount of $23,600,000 in order to help with furnishing, remodeling and renovating various buildings in the school district.[2] This bond would have extended the current one, making it possible for needed upgrades to occur in the schools. School officials cited old buildings and safety issues as the main concern and need for the further funding. The current $7.59 levy that is in place would have remained for a further eleven years if the measure had been approved. [3] Public forums were held to educate local residents on the issue, hoping that by emphasizing the savings of around $73,000 annually for the district that residents would be more willing to vote in favor of the bond. This would have also allowed general fund money to be used elsewhere in the school district. School officials also emphasized the safety upgrades that are important to student safety.[4]

References