October 8, 2004

Voters to decide fate of San Jose-Evergreen Community College District Measure G Bond

By Sheila Sanchez
Staff Writer

San Jose City College (SJCC) buildings are so old that some students are concerned for their safety. Evergreen Valley College (EVC) students are frustrated because their much-needed multi-disciplinary classroom building may not get built.

Both colleges have many structures halfway completed because of the Proposition 13 years when the 1978 initiative cut the state’s notoriously high property taxes by 30 percent.

“It stopped us cold from being able to improve the colleges,” said Michael Hill, co-chairman of the Building on Success Measure G Bond Campaign Committee for the San Jose-Evergreen Community College District.

Hill, the district’s vice chancellor for finance and administration, is now leading the campaign for passage of the new $185 million, Measure G Bond to fund instructional facilities, safety enhancements, technology buildings and equipment, more student parking lots and facilities for physical development such as health and fitness education classes.

Crucial for student success
Charles Montgomery, a spokesman for the bond campaign, said the measure’s passage is crucial for student success. He said both colleges lack enough classroom space for students.

“This fall I got to see the unfortunate sight of an instructor with his class wandering around trying to find an empty classroom,” said Montgomery.“We need more classrooms that are flexible. We need classrooms for everything, from English 1A to engineering 160.”

Richard Hobbs, co-chairman of the bond campaign committee and president of the district board of trustees, said the bond is crucial because the district has the fastest growing student population in the Bay Area. He said a recent survey has revealed that while every community college district in the Bay Area has experienced a dip in enrollment, the SJECCD has not.

“This means we need to take care of our infrastructure. The demographics are driving the need to improve the facilities and build additional ones,” Hobbs said.

EVC students and professors complain about the college’s infrastructure being 30 years old and in desperate need of upgrades.

Similarly, SJCC students and professors gripe about outdated technology equipment, especially in its training facilities, and the lack of a public health training complex where students can receive new instruction on emerging medical technologies.

Deteriorating structures
If the bond doesn’t pass Measure G on Nov. 2, education officials fear the colleges’ master plans will not be completed, problems with deteriorating structures will continue, electrical and gas wiring will continue to age and eventually be unable to meet the technology demands of the district’s growing student population.

At SJCC, Hill said the campus would have a “strange collection of new facilities and very old facilities…like having one new shoe and one old shoe.”

If voters support the bond, Hill said SJCC would plan buildings for applied sciences, biotechnology sciences, mathematics, cosmetology and humanities/fine arts.

Measure G would also fund the construction of a long-awaited multi-disciplinary campus in Milpitas where the district has been trying to meet education demands by teaching out of high school classrooms and students have long distances to drive to attend the colleges in San Jose.

Hill and about 20 other members of the Building on Success Measure G Bond Committee hope to convince voters to support them once again. They see this new initiative, which the San Jose-Evergreen Community College District Board of Trustees passed July 13 for the November ballot, as a continuation of the November 1998 Measure I construction bond. That bond was passed by 74 percent of the electorate and authorized $135 million to improve building conditions in the district. Measure I was the first bond in the college district’s 75-year history.

“The voters supported us overwhelmingly the first time out when they were going to see increases in their taxes. Now we’re saying the tax rate won’t go higher and we’re halfway through the job,” Hill noted. “The first bond measure got us well on our way and this new bond measure will allow us to finish the job we started.”

Hill explained the bond would not increase tax rates per $100,000 of assessed property valuation. The bond will get its money because as new building occurs, properties change hands and the small annual increase is applied to currently held properties. He also added that not one penny of the bond will be used for administration or administrative costs.

Hill said the community would benefit from the improvements since the colleges are a community resource and their strength impacts property values.

At EVC, education officials want the money to build a swimming pool and offer physical therapy for disabled students and swimming classes for students and the community.

Hammer, Cunneen support Measure G
The bond committee, formed this past summer, has had several meetings to plan ways to increase awareness about the need for the bond’s passage. Its honorary members include former San Jose Mayor Susan Hammer and Jim Cunneen, president and CEO of the San Jose/Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce.

“They’ve lent their name to the campaign because they believe in what we’re doing,” Hill said. “Almost all elected officials in the valley have endorsed this bond.”

The committee is also aggressively raising funds to promote the bond because, although it believes the measure will benefit the community, no public money can be used for the bond campaign. This includes the use of college buildings, phones or other resources.

The college district serves more than half a million residents. SJCC has an enrollment of about 10,500 students and EVC has an enrollment of approximately 11,000.

Hill stressed campuses built for one-half of their current enrollments cannot accommodate existing needs.

Opponents of Measure G
Those against the bond, which will require 55 percent voter approval, include Dennis Umphress, president of the Silicon Valley Taxpayers’ Association and Allen Hacker, chairman of the Libertarian Party of Santa Clara County. Their ballot argument against the measure says that the college district believes “the ends justify the means.”

Opponents say bond repayments represent another property tax, that homeowners are still repaying $135 million of old district infrastructure bonds and that last March, Proposition 55 authorized $12.3 billion more to relieve overcrowding and repair older community colleges.

Hill pointed out that the funds were divided among all segments of public education, including the University of California and the California State University systems, as well as K-12 public education school districts in the state. “We had access to a tiny piece of that. We need much more for the sake of our students,” Hill said.

Opponents said the measure’s real cost is $550 million and that comparable “special” taxes would cost $185 million. To add injury to insult, they claim that 20 percent of the district’s graduates aren’t citizens and don’t benefit the community because they take their jobs outside the country.

“Only residents vote, whether or not they are homeowners. It’s unfair for tenants (41 percent of the electorate) who won’t be repaying these bonds to vote for more property taxes,” they said.

For more information on Measure G visit www.buildingonsuccess.org, call (408) 278-9851 or mail Ste. 207, 2400 Moorpark Ave., San Jose, Calif., 95128.