By Eleanor Yang Su
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
July 25, 2006
District officials say the proposal is the result of rapidly rising construction costs, overly optimistic construction estimates for the $685 million bond, and the completion of long-term facilities master plans that provided comprehensive redesigns for each of the district’s three campuses.
Despite the size of the proposed bond, district officials stress that the tax rate would not rise above the current cap of $25 per $100,000 in assessed property value. They can maintain the same cap because of escalating assessed property values, a growing number of condos and houses, and an extension on the period people will be taxed on the bonds. The earlier bond, known as Proposition S, is due to be paid off in 2030, and the new bond would extend payment by 13 years.
The proposed bond would tax about 229,400 homeowners living within the district boundaries, which roughly follows the city lines, not including Rancho Bernardo, Rancho Peñasquitos and Otay Mesa. The average home assessed at $291,000 would yield a maximum annual tax of $72.75.
During the past year, the district has plotted its long-term facilities plan, spending about $850,000 from Proposition S, soliciting input from students, faculty, staff, employers and community members and hiring architects to redesign the district.
“We feel that we owe it to our students and our communities to see that quality of instruction is matched by the quality of facilities,” said district Chancellor Constance Carroll. “If we held off, the buildings that we know we desperately need would not come about, and when we did get around to it, the buildings would cost much more in the future than they cost now.”
Among the projects proposed are:
A science building, engineering technology building, business technology building and humanities building at City College.
A math and science building, instructional technology building and instructional space for fine arts and dramatic arts at Mesa College.
A new student and campus center, renovations and upgrades to a science building, aviation maintenance technology center and public safety institute at Miramar College.
Several projects were supposed to be paid for by Proposition S, but the rising costs of construction means only about half the original list will be completed with that money, said Terry Davis, vice chancellor of business services.
Carroll said the proposed bond would probably be the last bond measure she could foresee for the next 50 to 75 years.
“We think this will take care of it,” Carroll said.
She added that she knows of no opposition to the bond, and external polling from October and June found about 62 percent of 800 homeowners polled said they would support the bond. The San Diego County Taxpayers Association has yet to take a position, and some critics of the bond passed in 2002 say they know too little about the project.
“It certainly raises my eyebrows that it’s for more money than the original one and so quickly after the last one,” said Ken Moser, a former district trustee and opponent of Proposition S. “I certainly don’t want another $100 in taxes, but I don’t know enough about it.”
Board President Marty Block said he’s optimistic for its chances.
“I very much support it because I think the strength of San Diego’s economy in the long run depends on the strength of the community college district,” Block said. “There are no frivolous projects on the list. Almost of them are for academic buildings.”
commenting closed for this article
No Commenting...