As schools across the state face a great deal of existential issues like staffing shortages , declining enrollment and inadequate special education programming , many teachers and staff must address these challenges from inside the walls of dilapidated buildings.
Should California add $10 billion to state debt to help solve its school infrastructure problem?
Proposition 2 asks voters to approve $10 billion in bond financing for aging public school and community college facilities across the state.
It’s the second time in five years voters are being asked to allow the state to take on debt — California voters rejected a $15 billion school bond in March 2020. The last successful school bond passed in 2016 and its $9 billion in funds have since been spent, leaving very little in the bank for school repairs.
State legislators have set their sights on a lower number in the 2024 election and are hoping that Californians are less hesitant to spend than they were four years ago.
Over the course of 30 years, the bond would cost the state around $18 billion, accounting for about $500 million a year from the state budget.
What a ‘yes’ vote means
A “yes” on Prop. 2 authorizes $10 billion in general obligation bonds for repair, upgrade and construction of facilities at K–12 public schools (including charter schools), community colleges, and career technical education programs, including for improvement of health and safety conditions and classroom upgrades.
What a ‘no’ vote means
A “no” vote means that the state could not borrow $10 billion to build new or renovate existing public school facilities.
What do schools need the money for?
According to the Public Policy Institute of California , up to 38% of California students attend schools that do not meet minimum facility standards — this means damaged floors, malfunctioning electrical systems, gas leaks, power failures, broken water pipes, mold, pest infestations and water contaminants, which can result in temporary school closures.
The effects of poor school facilities reverberate beyond safety and comfort — Several studies have concluded that the quality of school facilities has a measurable effect on children’s learning outcomes and the retention of staff. Poor physical environments and loud classrooms are associated with truancy, behavior problems and lower student achievement. Reading speed, comprehension and math performance are adversely affected by room temperatures above 74 degrees. School safety and sustainability have also been shown to affect student learning.
California is one of several states that does not pay for school repairs through a permanent funding stream. All things related to school facilities — maintenance, repairs, modernizations and new construction — are paid for by local or state bonds, and the state is having trouble keeping up. PPIC estimated in 2020 that maintaining and improving California’s K-12 school facilities could cost up to $100 billion. It is estimated that schools in Sacramento County have $10 billion in facilities needs alone.
Many schools in the state are in need of major renovations to maintain and upgrade aging buildings, plan for natural disasters, improve energy efficiency and ensure disability accommodations. Improved security infrastructure is also top of mind as schools deal with increased threats of violence.
Beyond these basic needs are classroom modernizations or facilities dedicated to specific educational programming or goals like improving arts or career training programs. Examples of these types of projects include constructing or modernizing STEM labs, performing arts venues, visual art studios, athletic gyms, fields and cafeterias.
Smaller and lower-income districts often suffer the worst from poor school facilities as they struggle to raise enough bond money through local measures. These districts largely rely on state bonds to repair or improve their buildings.
How would the money be distributed?
If passed, Prop. 2 would provide $8.5 billion for public schools divided into four categories: $4 billion for renovation of existing buildings, $3.3 billion for new construction and the purchase of land, $600 million for career technical education facilities and another $600 million for charter schools. The remaining $1.5 billion would be allocated to community college facilities.
To receive the money, a district must pass a bond of its own and then apply for a funding match of of up to 65% for renovations and 55% for new construction. Lower-wealth school districts are meant to receive a higher match for their money, and districts that are unable to raise more than $15 million can receive up to a 100% match.
Districts can also apply for funding to help build or renovate transitional kindergarten facilities as enrollment increases in response to the state’s implementation of universal transitional kindergarten.
Sacramento-area school districts that are seeking to pass local bond measures this November have high hopes for receiving a match from the state should their bonds be approved.
What is bond financing?
A bond is a loan. Governments use this method of long-term borrowing to raise money, often for major capital projects. The state obtains this money by selling bonds to investors, and taxpayers repay this money with interest. The bond is paid back over a 30 year
period and usually results in paying back about $1.40 for each $1 borrowed.
Voting for a bond does not directly raise your taxes, but it does limit what the government can spend on other things within its budget.
School districts can also put bond measures on the ballot, which fund facilities through similar means, but directly affect the tax rates for local property owners. Read more about local school bonds here.
Supporters of Prop. 2
Proponents for the measure , including State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and both the California Democratic and Republican Parties, say that this money is crucial for California schools to upgrade their facilities and provide safe, effective learning environments for children. Committees campaigning for the measure have raised at least $5.7 million, according to the Secretary of State.
“This money is badly needed,” said Rebeca Andrade, superintendent of Salinas City Elementary District in Monterey County. “We don’t have the money to make the basic, structural repairs that are needed at every one of our schools. Students need safe spaces to learn if they’re going to reach their full potential.”
Opponents of Prop. 2
Assemblyman Bill Essayli and president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association submitted the arguments against Prop. 2, writing that the proposition is “another attempt to circumvent California’s financial problems by asking taxpayers to approve a $10 billion bond for education financing that should have been included in this year’s $288 billion budget package.”
Other opponents argue that the bond would perpetuate inequality by rewarding school districts that already have construction money through robust local bonds and disadvantaging districts with small tax bases. A nonprofit law firm, Public Advocates, has threatened to sue the state should the measure be passed.
Local News
