MEASURE C’s NON-FACILITY PERSONAL PROPERTY KINDS OF PROJECTS!

Welcome to the Silicon Valley Property Taxpayers’ Association - Measure C’s Non-Facility Personal Property Kinds of Projects portion of our Web Site.

Notwithstanding proponents’ hype [“Measure C...will improve local college facilities...(and represent)s a smart plan to complete the renovation of classrooms, libraries and labs”], closer inspection of the district’s February 21, 2006 “Bond Measure Cost Summary” [on file in the Chancellor's Office] reveals only 59% of Measure C is actually destined to go towards “facility” kinds of repairs/renovations/improvements! The remainder [a whopping $202 Million] is earmarked for:

Ordinary personal property purchases [like $73½ Million for computers, printers and software; $15½ Million for office furniture, furnishings and machines (like a new telephone system); wood shop (like lathes) and auto shop (like tire changing and alignment) machinery and other equipment; and, $4.8 Million for new vehicles];

$40 million to “fund” possible purchase/renovation of a yet-to-be-identified off-campus office building;

$32 Million for 15 years [what happens after 15 years (click here)?] worth of "routine & state scheduled maintenance" [for which the district purportedly already budgets, and admits that for decades have been shamefully shortchanged];

$29.4 Million for administration and bond issuance and overhead; and,

$4.8 Million to payoff existing debt [like $1.6 Million owed on the district’s current telephone system]!

What do these “projects” [lumped under the February 21, 2006 Summary as “upgraded technology and equipment”] have to do with “education” per se; do they sound like district’s most “urgent and critical facility (kinds of) repairs;” and, how can they be reconciled with the district’s representation Measure C funds will “only be used for the [facility] repair and renovation projects listed?”

The district will likely respond Article XIIIA, §1(b)(3)(B) of the California Constitution allows community college districts to use bonds to “furnishing and equipping of school facilities,” and they’re correct. But that’s not the point! The district has been deceitful in its description of the kinds of projects Measure C will fund because it wants you to believe they're limited to facility kinds of repairs. Furthermore if agencies of government can further tax property owners for non-facility kinds of projects like these [remember, property owners already pay $70 Million annually so the district can pay for expenditures such as these; isn’t this enough?], then where and when will it end?

If you agree the district’s proposed non-facility personal property uses of Measure C funding are not warranted because they have been misleadingly presented to voters; and, that they do not represent its most “urgent and critical facility (kind of) repairs;” we urge you to VOTE NO!

Should you have questions or comments, please address them to Silicon Valley Property Taxpayers’ Association at:

measure_c@svpta.net

© Silicon Valley Property Taxpayers’ Association, 2006 [Revised Monday, September 11, 2006] - Terms and Conditions of your use of this Web Site.

parcel tax opposition, general obligation bond opposition, special assessment opposition, property tax opposition, parcel tax election, bond election, proposition 13, proposition 218, parcel tax opposition, general obligation bond opposition, special assessment opposition, property tax opposition, parcel tax election, bond election, proposition 13, proposition 218, parcel tax opposition, general obligation bond opposition, special assessment opposition, property tax opposition, parcel tax election, bond election, proposition 13, proposition 218, parcel tax opposition, general obligation bond opposition, special assessment opposition, property tax opposition, parcel tax election, bond election, proposition 13, proposition 218, parcel tax opposition, general obligation bond opposition, special assessment opposition, property tax opposition, parcel tax election, bond election, proposition 13, proposition 218