LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
	Santa Clara County, CA November 2, 1999 Election
	League of Women Voters Nonpartisan Analysis of Measure E Bond Foothill-De Anza Community College District

This nonpartisan analysis was prepared by the League of Women Voters of Palo Alto.

The Question

Should the Foothill-De Anza Community College District borrow $248 million through the sale of general obligation bonds at interest rates within the legal limits and with no proceeds used for administrator salaries, in order to repair and rehabilitate aging facilities, refurbish class-rooms, laboratories and restrooms, construct science and high-tech instructional facilities, and meet current health, safety and instructional standards at both colleges?

Background

Foothill and De Anza Colleges were established in 1957 and 1967, respectively, and serve the communities of Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Sunnyvale and parts of Cupertino and San Jose. The colleges offer education beyond the K-12 systems to an annual enrollment of approximately 40,000 students with programs that include academic courses for credits eligible for transfer to four-year public and private colleges and universities, as well as vocational and career programs in diverse industries. Enrollment is projected to grow by 15% by the year 2005 due to increasing numbers of high school graduates and increased demand for post-secondary education. The general funds annual budget of the District is $126 million. It is financed 40% from local tax revenues, 42% state and federal sources, 9% student tuition, and 9% other sources.

Proposal

Measure E will authorize $248 million general obligation bonds to be issued over a period of 10 years to provide funds for the repair, renovation, rehabilitation, and construction of new instructional and service facilities for Foothill and De Anza Colleges as well as for the District. Approval requires a 2/3 majority vote of those voting on Measure E. It is estimated that property taxes will increase by about $14 per $100,000 assessed valuation when all bonds are sold.

Arguments in Favor of Measure E

• Necessary maintenance and updating of buildings have not been possible due to constraints in state and local funding. No bonds have been authorized since 1972.
  
• Facilities need to be repaired and updated to meet advances in technology, the increasing demand for high tech courses, and increasing enrollment.
  
• Seismic upgrades and other health and safety requirements necessary to meet state and federal standards will safeguard students, faculty and property.
  
• Passage of Measure E will qualify the District to receive state matching funds.
  
• An independent oversight committee will provide added accountability for expenditures.

Arguments against Measure E

• Measure E can cost taxpayers approximately $372 million in interest payments over the life of the bonds.
  
• Maintenance and renovation projects should be funded by annual budget expenditures.
  
• Tax deductible general obligation bonds provide tax shelters for taxpayers and lower income tax revenue for state and federal governments.
  
• Measure E does not provide specific information of the details and priorities of the projects to be funded by the Bonds.

Smart Voter '99 <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © 1999 League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.