This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Schools

School Board Opposes Expanding Elementary Construction Bond

Trustees are unwilling to make improvements to San Mateo schools to sweeten the bond for construction of a fourth Foster City school.

An initial proposal to make improvements to San Mateo schools as part of a district wide bond measure that would also pay for the construction of a does not sit well with some district trustees.

Superintendent Cynthia Simms suggested at the district board meeting Thursday night in Foster City that the trustees consider floating a bond measure to all district voters that would include improvements such as buying new computers for classrooms, and building solar panels on schools in San Mateo.

Simms' suggestion put a new spin on how to present a bond measure to district voters that would also go toward paying for the construction of a new elementary school in Foster City.

Enrollment hikes in Foster City have driven the need for a fourth school, due to concerns that the the current facilities have already reached the capacity of students. 

A previously approved effort to go out to solely Foster City voters for a $25 million bond measure to build the school was pulled by the board in August amidst concerns about splitting the district for bond passage.

The prospect of including improvements to San Mateo schools in the bond measure would require an increase to the amount that voters would be asked to sponsor.

But the new superintendent's suggestion was met with fierce opposition by board president Mark Hudak, who said he could not support a tax increase in San Mateo for such improvements.

"I don't know how I could face my neighbors in San Mateo and say we want $50 million for computers and solar. I cannot support that," said Hudak.

The board has stated its intention to spend roughly 70 percent of all district-wide bonds on San Mateo schools, since only about 30 percent of the district's enrollment is comprised of students from Foster City.

Furthermore, Hudak said that the only way he could support splitting the district for a bond measure would be to ensure that Foster City residents were willing to foot the entire bill to build their own school.

"I do not think the fourth school is a justifiable economic solution to the issue of overcrowding," said Hudak.

But he continued that he would approve a bond measure to solely Foster City residents, should they prove willing to pay for the school themselves.

Pollster Brian Godbe gave a presentation to the board at Thursday's meeting as well promoting the benefits of polling before going out to voters for a bond passage, but the board declined directing him to move forward with that effort.

Candidates for the City Council of Foster City in the fall elections have suggested that the school district consider adding a second floor to some of the existing buildings on campuses in order to expand enrollment capacity, rather than build a fourth school.

But the district has already selected a potential site inside Charter Square at 1050-1064 Shell Blvd., Foster City to build the fourth elementary school. It is in the process of negotiating a purchase price for the site, as well as searching for an architect to design the campus.

Money from the $175 million Measure L bond fund passed in 2008 would be used to purchase the property, but could not be used to cover the cost of construction of the new school.

Trustee Ellen Mallory Ulrich said that she too had reservations about going out to all district voters for the bond measure, because there are already so many existing taxes currently in place for current residents.

"I feel that we are as a community completely overtaxed," said Ulrich, citing the taxes to sponsor the college, high school, and elementary school districts.

Perhaps the sole voice in favor of the superintendent's suggestion to float a district-wide bond was trustee Julie Chan, who represents Foster City.

She especially pointed toward the long term savings the district may experience by installing solar panels on its buildings.

No decision was made at Thursday's meeting. Instead the board members will take two weeks to mull over further ideas of how to approach the bond issue, and will return to discuss it further at the next meeting October 20.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?