Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District Bond Issue, Measure X (November 2015)
| Measure info Amount: $148 million |
|---|
| 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 |
A bond issue was on the ballot for San Mateo-Foster City School District voters in San Mateo County, California, on November 3, 2015. It was approved.
Measure X authorized the district to increase its debt by up to $148 million through issuing general obligation bonds in that amount. The bonds were designed to be repaid within a maximum of 40 years. District officials estimated that an average property tax levy of $14.8 per $100,000 of assessed property value would be required to repay the bonds.[1]
As of 2014, the district served 11,204 students in 20 schools and had an operating budget of $129.6 million.[2][3]
In 2013, district voters rejected a $130 million bond measure, Measure P.
A 55 percent supermajority vote was required for the approval of Measure X.
Election results
| San Mateo-Foster City ESD, Measure X | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
 Yes | 13,177 | 59.07% | ||
| No | 9,129 | 40.93% | ||
- Election results from San Mateo County Elections Office
Text of measure
Ballot question
The following question appeared on the ballot:[4]
| “ |
To provide additional classrooms, relieve overcrowding and address increasing enrollment at San Mateo and Foster City schools, with funding that cannot be taken by the State, shall San Mateo - Foster City Elementary School District replace aging portable classrooms, update ad add new classrooms, provide modern classrooms, reduce class size, improve handicapped access, repair, construct, acquire equipment, classrooms, sites/facilities, by issuing $148,000,000 of bonds at legal rates, with citizen oversight, no money for administrators' salaries, and all funds benefiting San Mateo and Foster City schools?[5] |
” |
Impartial analysis
The full text of the impartial analysis of Measure X that was prepared by the office of the county counsel is available here.[1]
Full text
The full text of the bond measure is available here.
Support
Supporters
The following individuals signed the official argument in favor of Measure X:[4]
- Art Kieser, mayor of Foster City
- Audrey NG, president of San Mateo-Foster City School District Board of Trustees
- Gloria R. Brown, education advocate
- Mark D. Hudak, San Mateo resident
- Susan Totaro, San Mateo-Foster City school district bond oversite committee member
Arguments in favor
Supporters of Measure X argued that the district had an overcrowding problem and that the bond revenue from Measure X would be used for essential construction projects to decrease class sizes.[4]
Official argument
The official argument in favor of Measure X submitted for inclusion on the ballot can be read here.
Editorials
- The San Mateo Daily Journal editorial board wrote an article endorsing a "yes" vote on Measure X. An excerpt of the editorial is below:
| “ |
It’s been a long road for those contemplating the best way to help solve overcrowding issues for the San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District. [...] Measure X is not perfect, but no measure seeking to address so many needs and community wish lists can be. However, it is a solid approach to contending with the district’s pressing and immediate need for additional capacity that was honed through a long and involved community process. This measure will simply add classrooms to the district. The individual impact of the measure is itself mild, $15 per $100,000 assessed valuation. And indeed it can be seen as a critical investment into our children’s future and the intrinsic value of our community. Our schools are successful, and that reflects our investment into them. The district is filled with top-notch teachers who deserve the proper space to do their job. That should be our top priority and Measure X is a reflection of that. Vote yes.[5] |
” |
| —San Mateo Daily Journal editorial board[6] | ||
Opposition
Opponents
Mark W.A. Hinkle, the president of the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, signed the official argument in opposition to Measure X.[7]
Arguments against
Official argument
The following official argument was submitted in opposition to Measure X:
| “ |
In 2014, voters in the District overwhelming rejected a $130,000,000 bond measure. Yet, the School District Board clearly didn’t get the message. Now, they’re back for that $130,000,000 plus another $18,000,000. What part of NO didn’t the school board get? They claim this bond measure is needed to provide 50 new classrooms for enrollment that has increased from school year 2011-12 to 2013-14 (latest figures available) by 501 students. That’s only 10 students per classroom. Let’s do the math: $148,000,000 divided by 50 new classrooms equals $2,960,000 per classroom. Those sure must be very special classroom at $2,960,000 each! In 2010, just 5 years ago, voters in the district did pass a parcel tax to “support smaller class sizes”. What happened to that money? Clearly, if they need 50 new classrooms, that money didn’t get spent on class size reduction. Finally, school bonds, just like mortgages, have to be paid back, in full, plus interest. These interest payments (tax money from you) don’t go to teachers, libraries, computers, or maintenance, etc.; they just go to service the debt. Debt you have to pay for. Debt your children will have to pay for and debt your grandchildren will have to pay for. Bonds can last up to 40 years!!! Is this the best use of your tax dollars? At some point, enough is enough! If you oppose this huge debt burden, please vote NO on Measure X. Make the School Board pay attention to you: no means no!!! You can be for schools, for students, and against Measure X.[5] |
” |
| —Mark W.A. Hinkle, the president of the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association[7] | ||
Path to the ballot
Measure X was put on the ballot by a vote of the San Mateo-Foster City School District Board of Trustees.[1]
Related measures
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms San Mateo Foster school bond Measure X. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
San Mateo-Foster City Elementary School District Bond Issue, Measure X (November 2015) - Google News
See also
- Local school bonds on the ballot
- San Mateo County, California ballot measures
- November 3, 2015 ballot measures in California
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 San Mateo County Elections Office, "Impartial Analysis of Measure X," accessed October 2, 2015
- ↑ Ed-Data, "District Profile - Fiscal Year: 2011-12," accessed January 20, 2014
- ↑ Ed-Data, "District Reports," accessed December 11, 2014
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Smart Voter, “Measures appearing on the ballot on November 3, 2015,” accessed September 29, 2015
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ The San Mateo Daily Journal, "Editorial: Yes on Measure X," October 23, 2015
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association, "Argument Against the San Mateo/Foster City Elementary School District $148,000,000 Bond Issue: Measure X," accessed October 24, 2015
| |||||
