Ten propositions appear on the statewide California ballot for voters to decide on; however, one of the most important is Prop 2: a $10 billion bond for schools. Of the $10 billion, $8.5 billion would go to K-12 schools and the other $1.5 billion would go to community colleges. The money from Prop 2 is intended to be used for maintenance and safety repairs in schools. Voting Yes on Prop 2 will ensure a clean and healthy environment for students.
Community colleges would make use of their bond money by proposing plans for projects to the governor and legislature. The money for public K-12 school facilities, however, would be split up into four categories: renovation of existing buildings, new construction, facilities for Career Technical Education (CTE) programs, and charter schools.
Grants for new constructions and renovations would be available for school districts based mainly on a first-come, first-serve basis. For CTE programs and charter school funds, schools would have to go through a competitive application process.
$115 million of the renovation fund would be used to reduce the lead levels in public schools’ water systems, as multiple schools in California have tested above the lead action level of 15 ppb. However, even when schools test below 15 ppb, the water can pose harmful risks to students. This money would not only be used for removing lead from schools’ water but for the repairs of school systems in general: reducing the risk of other health and safety hazards.
About 30% of the school buildings in California are at least 50 years old, and in those 50-plus years, maintenance has often been spotty, at best In districts across the state, 38% of students go to schools that don’t meet California’s minimum safety standards. Schools with insufficient funds aren’t able to fix facility issues, leading to risky or potentially harmful circumstances for students. With the money provided by Prop 2, schools would be able to fix damaged ceilings, air conditioning, and electrical systems, as well as improve safety and security protection by financing emergency communications, door locks, alarm systems, and more.
Funding for school maintenance comes mainly from either state or local bonds. Districts in wealthier areas are able to raise more money through local bonds, whereas districts in lower-income areas struggle to raise enough money for necessary repairs, relying mainly on money from the state. California’s last bond of $9 billion for the funding of public education was approved in 2016, with voters denying a $15 billion bond in 2020. The state’s school repair fund is expected to be spent by this January, leaving thousands of schools with no state funds for upgrades and repairs.
Instead of school districts raising funds solely through local bonds, Prop 2 lays out that the state would match any money earned from local bonds. Districts would provide 45-50% of new construction funding and 35-40% of renovation funding with the state granting the remaining portion. In order for districts to pay back local bond money, property taxes are raised in individual communities. Lower local bonds would result in lower property taxes for residents.
Although funding this measure would increase state debt, it is urgently needed for basic repairs and reducing risks in schools.
With California already having the highest gas taxes in the nation and rising inflation, voters worry about tax increases brought by any new bond. Approving the bond would have significant changes to California’s budget and cost $17.5 billion including interest. In order to pay the money back, the state legislature would have to factor payments into the budget every year, increasing state costs by about $500 million a year for 35 years.
However, state bonds do not directly raise residents’ taxes. Instead, the government prioritizes what to spend on and limits spending on other programs. The $10 billion is paid back from California’s general fund, an account used to pay for most public programs, with the 35 annual payments of $500 million only accounting for less than 1% of the total general fund budget.
Prop 2 also creates more accountability by requiring that projects be approved by school districts and local communities before being funded. It would allow local voters to have control over how the funds are being used and make sure that the money is being spent directly on the school.
Denying the proposition would only delay urgent repairs in schools. Students deserve safe and clean learning environments to pursue their education in. Prop 2 will address urgent needs in districts and work towards building better schools for young minds.
