In California, there’s no dedicated stream of funding to support the upkeep of the state’s 10,000 public K-12 schools and 115 community college campuses.

Instead, leaders often ask voters to approve bonds to pay for repairs, renovations, and new construction.

Proposition 2 would fund $8.5 billion of projects for K-12 public schools and $1.5 billion at community colleges.

Official title on the ballot: Proposition 2: Authorizes bonds for public school and community college facilities.

Understanding Proposition 2

There are 5.9 million K-12 students and more than 1.9 million community college students who attend class, play sports, and eat lunch in publicly funded schools.

Research ties the quality of school facilities to student achievement — it’s easier to learn in clean, climate-controlled, well-lit classrooms. Poorly maintained schools are prone to disruption during extreme weather, like September’s heat wave, and may even pose health risks to students and staff.

Throughout California, 38% of K-12 students go to schools that do not meet the minimum standard to be considered clean, safe, and functional.

There are two major sources of funding to build and maintain school facilities: state and local bonds.

Prop. 2 is the former, though your local school district may also have its own facilities funding measure on the ballot. (Stay tuned: We’ll go over the nuts and bolts of those measures in a separate voter guide).

Cram session

During AirTalk's Ballot Cram Session live event, Larry Mantle talked with Caltech's Michael Alvarez, Pomona College's Sara Sadhwani and Claremont McKenna College's Zachary Courser about Proposition 2.

The history behind it

The Legislature and Governor Gavin Newsom reached a deal on Prop. 2 this summer after months of negotiations. The state’s fund school repairs and construction is almost gone:

• The last statewide bond for community colleges and K-12 schools passed in 2016. 
• Voters rejected a school facilities bond in March 2020 — the first time they’d turned down a school bond since 1994. 
• It’s more rare, but the state also can also appropriate money for school and community college renovations and construction without a bond. The Legislative Analyst’s Office found the state kicked in an additional $4.6 billion for facilities projects in recent years.

The California Office of Public School Construction estimates the remaining money will be exhausted by February 2025 and there's a growing backlog — schools have applied for $3.9 billion in additional funding for construction and modernization projects.

When schools don’t have money to make regular repairs, maintenance costs add up. 

“These aren't luxury renovation projects we're talking about here,” said Sara Hinkley, who studies facilities funding at UC Berkeley’s Center for Cities + Schools. “We're talking about funding to just get schools up to the point where they can be usable every day of the school year.”

Earlier this year, a public interest law firm threatened to sue the state if it did not change how it distributed school facilities funding.

California school facilities funding is not distributed equally. Research shows the existing facilities funding system favors larger, more affluent school districts.

Remember: Proceeds from state bonds like Prop. 2 are given out as matching grants — they require districts to chip in money to get money.

Districts raise funding through property taxes; the amount of money they can bring in through local bond measures is restricted to a certain percentage of a property’s assessed value.

Districts with higher value property (more expensive houses and lucrative commercial properties) can collect more money — some districts can fund repairs without the state’s help. Districts in poorer communities can raise fewer dollars — even if they serve more students — and are more reliant on limited state funding.

Put simply, “the more money you can raise, the more money you'll get from the state,” Hinkley said.

And the majority of the funding is awarded to schools on a first-come, first-served basis.

“Districts that can move more quickly also have an advantage,” Hinkley said. “Those tend to be districts that have more funding. So they have larger facilities, departments, or they can pay consultants to move those projects through.”

How it would work

California would distribute $8.5 billion to public K-12 school districts in matching grants.

To get money from the state for repair and construction projects, local school districts have to provide:

• 45-50% of the funding for new construction
• 35-40% of the funding for renovations

Districts that are able to raise fewer local dollars for school facilities and those that serve larger populations of low-income students, English language learners and foster youth will pay a smaller share of the construction costs than more-affluent districts.

There are also limited portions of the funding set aside for small districts, and reducing lead in schools’ water.

Charter schools and career and technical education programs apply for funding through a separate, competitive application process.

The Governor and Legislature would decide which projects to fund with the $1.5 billion for community colleges.

What people who support it say

School leaders and education advocates say there is an urgent need to repair leaky roofs, increase security, and prepare school campuses for the increasing likelihood of disaster tied to extreme heat, fires, and earthquakes.

Community college advocates say upgrades will help increase access to affordable higher education and expand services for veterans.

While $10 billion sounds like a lot of money, local K-12 and community districts are requesting nearly 5 times that amount in local bonds, according to the Coalition for Adequate School Housing, a group that advocates for school facilities resources.

"We need to continue to invest in our school facilities in order to ensure that they're in good condition, that they're safe and they ensure a healthy environment for our students," said Rebekah Kalleen, the legislative advocate for the Coalition.

Supporters also point to accountability measures including audits, local control, and oversight from the community.

Dozens of supporting organization include:

• California Teachers Association — the state’s largest educators union 
• California School Nurses Organization — the state’s professional association for school nurses 
• Community College League of California — the professional association for the state’s 73 public community college districts

Though there are criticisms of how the school facilities funding system favors more affluent districts, the reality, supporters say, is that rejecting the bond will only delay needed repairs.

“There are two things that are both true — one is that this funding isn't sufficient, but we need it passed,” Hinkley said.

Read more: Yes on Prop. 2 — Californians for Quality Schools

What people who oppose it say

Prop. 2’s primary opponent is a nonprofit organization dedicated to upholding legislation passed in 1978 that limited changes to California property taxes. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association also opposed the failed statewide 2020 school facilities bond.

The primary concern is the $10 billion price tag.

“It's not free money — it has to be paid back with interest,” said Susan Shelley, HJTA’s vice president of communications.

The organization also opposes the proposition on the basis that school districts will seek to increase property taxes in individual communities to raise the matching dollars needed to access state funding.

“We think bond financing has its place, but it should be judicious because it raises property taxes at the local level,” Shelley said. “It increases the debt burden on future budgets because bond payments have to be made ahead of current needs in the budget.”

Shelley also questioned why local districts continue to request funding when enrollment is declining — 6% fewer students attend California schools than a decade ago.

“The problem isn't the bonds,” Shelley said. “The problem is the priorities of the people spending the money and, and how efficiently they spend the money.”

Read more: The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association Prop. 2 recommendation

Potential financial impact

A bond is basically a loan. The $10 billion authorized by Prop. 2 would be paid back — with interest — from the general fund. The annual average payments of about $500 million annually for 35 years account for less than one-half of 1% of the general fund budget, according to the Legislative Analyst’s office.

The debt is not passed directly on to residents, but some may still see their property taxes increase if their local school districts decide to ask for local bonds to fund their share of the construction cost.

Follow the money

Further reading

• Official voter information on Prop. 2 — Summary, analysis, arguments for and against the measure prepared by the Attorney General.
• California Legislative Analyst’s Office — an analysis by the Legislature’s nonpartisan policy and fiscal advisory body.
• Lawmakers reach agreement on $10 billion school bond to fix thousands of schools in disrepair — The backstory on how the Legislature and Gov. Newsom landed on a compromise.
• Does a proposed $10 billion bond favor richer California school districts? — More on why low-income and small districts say the bond continues a long history of inequitable facilities funding.

Listen in: AirTalk tackles Prop. 2

Before you read more, we wanted to take a moment to tell you about our mission here at LAist, and why we're so dedicated to helping you get ready to vote.

In the lead-up to this important election, our hard-working reporters and editors spent hundreds and hundreds of hours researching and writing these detailed guides and fact-based resources. We invested that time because we're here to help you vote confidently and make your community a better place.

But we cannot do this essential work without your help. We rely on donations from readers like you to stay independent, which keeps our nonprofit newsroom strong and accountable to you.

At a time when the need for local journalism has never been greater, many newsrooms are facing cutbacks, including LAist. Member support — your support — is what will sustain a free press in Southern California.

LAist’s mission is to be here for you, so please be here for us now with a donation to power our trusted local reporting. Step up right now and make the choice to give. Because that’s exactly what it is — a choice. It's choice with consequences. If readers do not choose to step up and donate, the future of fact-based news in Southern California will not be as strong.

No matter what happens in the world, LAist will remain a voice you know and trust.

Thank you for your generous support.

Sincerely,

• 

  Megan Garvey

  Executive Editor

  (she/her)

Chip in now to fund your local journalism

Continue

Monthly Donation One-Time Donation

$5/mo

$10/mo

$15/mo

$20/mo

$60

$120

$180

$240

Continue

(

LAist

)

This voter guide originally published Sept. 13.