Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bond Measure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District consultants say community support exists for $256M Bonita Unified bond; board reviews June timeline
Summary
Consultants reported survey results showing initial support of 57% for a proposed Proposition 39 bond measure that rose to 61% after education; the potential $59-per-$100,000 rate could raise about $256 million, and the board reviewed accountability requirements and a tight calendar to qualify for the June ballot.
Consultants working with the district said a recent feasibility survey found majority support for a potential Proposition 39 general obligation bond and presented a schedule and outreach plan if the board moves to place a measure on the June 2 ballot.
Joy Coomer of Team Civics said initial, minimalist exposure to a 75-word ballot question produced about 57% support and that additional information about projects and accountability raised support to roughly 61%. She described outreach materials, mail pieces with QR-linked videos, and a facilities advisory committee that informed communications. Coomer said community priorities aligned with the district’s list: HVAC replacement, plumbing repairs, safety and security upgrades, modern science labs, and increased facility space.
Advisers outlined a scenario at a $59-per-$100,000 tax rate that could generate about $256,000,000 under conservative assumptions on interest rates and assessed-value growth, and bond counsel reviewed Proposition 39 requirements: a 55% voter threshold, a required bond project list, annual independent performance and fiscal audits and a citizen’s oversight committee.
Staff and consultants noted deadlines: to qualify for the June ballot the board would need to vote on a resolution ordering an election before March 6, with rating, investor outreach and sale steps scheduled through April and a closing in early May if the board proceeds.
Board members asked about what projects fall under the 'facilities' language and whether plumbing and cameras were covered; presenters confirmed that the broad ballot phraseology and the detailed bond project list together allow those projects and that project types must be described by type, not by specific building-by-building detail.
