Orange Unified School District Bond Proposition, Measure K (November 2014)
Bond elections |
---|
2018 • 2017 • 2016 • 2015 2014 • 2013 • 2012 • 2011 2010 • 2009 • 2008 All years and states |
Property tax elections |
2018 • 2017 • 2016 • 2015 2014 • 2013 • 2012 • 2011 2010 • 2009 • 2008 All years and states |
See also |
State comparisons How voting works Approval rates |
An Orange Unified School District Bond Proposition, Measure K ballot question was on the November 4, 2014 election ballot for voters in the Orange Unified School District in Orange County, California. It was defeated.
If approved, Measure K would have authorized the district to increase its debt by $296 million through issuing general obligation bonds in that amount. District officials estimated that an average property tax rate of $39 per $100,000 of assessed property value would have been required to repay these bonds.[1]
A 55 percent supermajority vote was required for the approval of this measure.
Election results
Orange County, Measure K | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
![]() | 21,613 | 45.4% | ||
Yes | 25,992 | 54.6% |
Election results via: Orange County Registrar of Voters
Text of measure
Ballot question
The question on the ballot appeared as:[2]
“ |
To repair or replace aging, outdated high school classrooms/science labs with safe, modern facilities and maintain the quality of education, upgrade career-training facilities, libraries, and computer systems to keep pace with technology, improve student safety/campus security, acquire, construct, repair schools, facilities/equipment to provide students with the education and training needed to succeed in college/careers, shall Orange Unified School District issue $296 million in bonds at legal rates, with independent citizen oversight, no money for administrator salaries, and all money staying local?[3] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The following impartial analysis was prepared for this measure:[4]
“ |
Approval of the measure would authorize the Board of Education of the Orange Unifi ed School District (“District”) to issue general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $296,000,000. The California Constitution provides that school districts may issue general obligation bonds for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation or replacement of school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of school facilities or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities, with the approval of 55% of the voters of the district, voting at an election for that purpose. The measure provides that funds received from the sale of the bonds will be used for projects at high schools in the District, including upgrading and constructing classrooms and science labs; upgrading libraries and career training facilities; replacing portable classrooms; renovating and constructing athletic facilities; adding electrical service capacity; improving disability access; upgrading fi re alarm systems and adding sprinklers and fi re safety doors; upgrading security and emergency communications systems; retrofi tting buildings for earthquake safety; removing hazardous materials; installing energy effi cient systems; improving heating, ventilation, air and lighting systems; providing technology, data and communication equipment; upgrading wireless systems, telecommunications, Internet and network connections and electrical wiring; and upgrading and replacing hardware and infrastructure systems, classroom and library technology and teaching equipment. The measure provides that a citizens’ oversight committee will be established to ensure that bond proceeds are properly expended. In addition, annual performance and fi nancial audits will be conducted. The measure further provides that bond proceeds will not be used for teacher or administrator salaries or other school operating expenses. Approval of this measure will also authorize the District to levy an ad valorem tax on the assessed value of real property within the District by an amount needed to pay the principal and interest on these bonds in each year that the bonds are outstanding. The Tax Rate Statement for the measure in this sample ballot pamphlet refl ects the District’s best estimates, based upon currently available data and projections, of the property tax rates required to service the bonds. If 55% of the voters of the District voting on the measure vote yes, the District will be authorized to issue bonds in an amount not to exceed $296,000,000 and levy the related taxes as estimated in the Tax Rate Statement. A no vote on this measure will disapprove the issuance of the bonds and the levy of the taxes for such bonded indebtedness. The measure was placed on the ballot by the Board of Education of the District. Approval of Measure K does not guarantee that the proposed project or projects in the District that are the subject of bonds under Measure K will be funded beyond the local revenues generated by Measure K. The District’s proposal for the project or projects may assume the receipt of matching state funds, which could be subject to appropriation by the Legislature or approval of a statewide bond measure.[3] |
” |
—Orange County Counsel[4] |
Full text
The full text of the measure and project list is available here.
Support
Supporters
The following individuals signed the official arguments in favor of this measure:[5]
- Todd Spitzer, Orange County Supervisor and OUSD Parent
- Kristin Erickson, co-chair of CARE, OUSD Parent and El Modena Graduate
- Gaddi H. Vasquez, U.S. Ambassador (ret.) and Orange High Graduate
- Rev. Melissa Smith, Anaheim Hills Pastor and Canyon High School parent
- James L. Doti, president of Chapman University
The pro-Measure K campaign was ran by a group called Community Advancement through Renovation for Education (CARE)[6]
Arguments in favor
The following was submitted as the official arguments in favor of this measure:[5]
“ |
Whether or not you have school-age children, protecting the quality of local schools, the value of your home and the quality of life in our community is a wise investment. Orange Unified School District has four award-winning high schools— Canyon, EI Modena, Orange and Villa Park—serving nearly 9,000 students. Student test scores are rising and the graduation rate is 97%. All four schools were built 40-60 years ago and have never been renovated. A recent study concluded that they all require urgent upgrades to protect student safety and ensure our students have the same opportunities as those in neighboring communities. Measure K provides a fiscally responsible solution to:
Measure K helps local schools qualify for millions in state matching funds that will otherwise go to other communities. Measure K meets the Orange County Taxpayers Association school bond criteria. Local students must graduate with skills needed for college and to compete for 21st-century jobs. Good schools protect our local property values. Please vote Yes on K.[3] |
” |
—Todd Spitzer, Kristin Erickson, Gaddi H. Vasquez, Rev. Melissa Smith and James L. Doti[5] |
Opposition
Opponents
The following individuals signed the official arguments in opposition to this measure:[7]
- Alexia L. Deligianni-Brydges, Ed.D., vice president of Orange Unified School District
- Robert M. Hammond, vice president of Orange County Board of Education
- Wayne Lindholm, president of the Lincoln Club of Orange County
- Deborah Pauly, city councilwoman
- Ed Sachs, member of Community Common Sense
Arguments against
The following was submitted as the official arguments in opposition to this measure:[7]
“ |
A bond works like a government credit card, and paying off that government credit card requires raising your taxes. This is the third time in 11 years that there’s been an expensive bond proposed in the Orange Unified School District:
Aren’t we taxed enough already? At $296,000,000, Measure K is the largest bond ever proposed by a school district in Orange County history! Anaheim Hills, Garden Grove, North Tustin, Orange, Orange Park Acres, Santa Ana, Silverado, and Villa Park can’t afford a $296,000,000 tax hike. Measure K’s bond debt is three times the size of the City of Orange’s General Fund budget! Just two years ago, California voters approved Proposition 30. The teachers’ unions promised “billions in new funding for our schools” from Proposition 30. Proposition 30 raised your income tax and your sales tax. Measure K raises your property tax. What tax will they raise next? What does a property tax increase mean for you?
As voters, we’ve already voted against the Orange Unified School District bonds twice: vote “No” on Measure K to tell the education bureaucrats that they need to learn to live within their means instead of asking taxpayers to give more and more. Vote “No” on Measure K to stop the $296,000,000 tax hike – the largest proposed by any school district in Orange County history![3] |
” |
—Alexia L. Deligianni-Brydges, Robert M. Hammond, Wayne Lindholm, Deborah Pauly and Ed Sachs[7] |
See also
- Orange Unified School District, California
- Orange Unified School District elections (2014)
- Local school bonds on the ballot
- Orange County, California ballot measures
- November 4, 2014 ballot measures in California
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Orange County Elections Office, "Tax Rate Statement for Measure K," archived August 31, 2014
- ↑ Orange County Elections Office, "Full Text of Measure K," archived August 31, 2014
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Orange County Elections Office, "Impartial analysis of Measure K," archived August 28, 2014
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Orange County Elections Office, "Arguments in support of Measure K," archived August 28, 2014
- ↑ Care for OUSD website, accessed August 31, 2014
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Orange County Elections Office, "Arguments in opposition to Measure K," archived August 28, 2014
![]() |
State of California Sacramento (capital) |
---|---|
Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |