In the November election, voters in San Diego County, California, approved 14 school bonds totaling 61 billion dollars. This marked the highest number and total amount of school bonds in the voting history of San Diego County dating back to half a century ago.
School districts utilize these bonds to borrow money, with taxpayers paying back the principal and interest by increased property taxes.
The Chair and CEO of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association (SDCTA), Haney Hong, expressed surprise at the sheer volume of bond proposals and the total amount. He stated, “I’ve never seen this many tax increases proposed, so I am very shocked. But in reality, I’m not surprised… because this is the issue facing California, and this situation will continue unless we truly start changing some fundamental things.”
One of the fundamental problems, according to Hong, is the governmental structure. “We have too many local governments, including school districts, and a lot of money is spent on administration because each school district has its own set of administrators.”
Hong highlighted another issue as the “out-of-control labor costs,” including the “continually rising” teacher salaries. He cited this as a “major reason” for the increased costs in school districts, which results in insufficient funds for regular maintenance.
“They haven’t taken care of the regular maintenance they should be doing. Then things break, and they come to ask for money for repairs. So, we see more bonds,” he explained.
In California, school districts rely on bonds for funding major renovations, new constructions, and large projects, while the general funding from the state government covers the basic operations of schools, including salaries.
In San Diego County, with hundreds of public schools under 42 districts, 18 districts proposed one or more bond measures this year. According to the San Diego County Office of Education, the total enrollment of K-12 students in San Diego County for the 2022-23 school year was approximately 477,000.
The San Diego County Taxpayers Association supported 15 out of the 22 bond measures, while opposing the remaining 7.
There are also five community college districts in San Diego County, with two of them proposing bond measures this year, seeking significant funding.
The San Diego Community College District’s Measure HH requested 3.5 billion dollars, and the Southwestern Community College District’s Measure SW asked for 800 million dollars. The San Diego County Taxpayers Association supported both these bond measures.
Measure HH aims to utilize the bond for classroom repairs, ensuring students’ affordability, helping students prepare for careers in nursing, firefighting, science, engineering, and improving resources available to veterans/homeless students.
Bernie Rhinerson, Chair of the San Diego Community College District Board, mentioned that this was their first bond application in 18 years. He explained that the bond is expected to support the district’s four colleges over the next twenty years, with seven campuses in the city of San Diego.
Rhinerson stressed the necessity of the bond to fund projects that might not receive state government support.
The Cajon Valley Union School District in East County San Diego proposed Measure W for 280 million dollars in bonds, which received support from the taxpayers but did not pass through the voters.
District Superintendent David Miyashiro stated the need for the bond to repair old facilities and equip campuses with new security systems. Miyashiro pointed out that some schools in the district have over 150 years of history. “Improving and updating these old infrastructure such as pipelines, foundations, and even electrical systems are very costly.”
The district also aimed to enhance a modern security system to monitor the campus. Miyashiro stated, “To install what are now considered standard security systems across the 28 schools in the district would require tens of millions of dollars, and such upgrades can only be accomplished through bonds.”
Miyashiro mentioned the possibility of reintroducing the bond measure to the ballot in 2026.
The approved 14 bonds have a tax rate of 19 to 40 dollars per year for every 100,000 dollars of property valuation. In other words, with an average rate estimate of 25 dollars, if a property is valued at 500,000 dollars, the homeowner would need to pay 125 dollars annually to cover the bond.
As property values continue to rise, property valuations are generally lower than market prices. If the property is within a school district and a community college district, both with approved bonds, the homeowner would need to pay taxes for both bonds.
Even tenants without property ownership could be impacted. Landlords may increase rents to cover higher taxes, passing the cost to tenants.
Hong noted that the districts where bonds were not approved were predominantly from the remote areas of San Diego County. He believed this was because people in these areas are already struggling and reluctant to pay more taxes.
He emphasized that if the state and local school districts could budget appropriately based on the needs of school facilities, voters would not see as many bond proposals.
“Unfortunately, very few people see how the entire system works,” he said. When people witness the deteriorating condition of school facilities, they hope to provide better facilities for their children, thus bonds often get approved.
“If everyone continues to support these bonds, what incentive do state governments and local school districts have to budget reasonably?” he questioned.