34,832 / 72.6% Yes votes ...... 13,121 / 27.4% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

By this measure, the Board of Trustees seeks voter approval to amend the purpose of these bonds to be used for demolition and construction projects, including the removal or replacement of outmoded or unsafe buildings and construction of new seismically safe facilities and classrooms at the District's six comprehensive high schools, and for any necessary site preparation, site improvements, easements or rights of way. The Board of Trustees' resolution ordering the election to amend the purpose of the bonds states that the purposes listed in this measure shall be united with the purposes voted upon in the November 7, 2000 election.

A "yes" vote on this measure would authorize San Mateo Union High School District to amend the purpose of the bonds already approved by the voters in an amount not to exceed $137.5 million to also be used for demolition and construction projects, including the removal or replacement of outmoded or unsafe buildings and construction of new seismically safe facilities and classrooms at the district's six comprehensive high schools, and for any necessary site preparation, site improvements, easements or rights of way.

A "no" vote would prevent San Mateo Union High School District from amending the purpose of the bond funds.

This measure passes if two-thirds (2/3) of those voting on the measure vote "yes."

The above statement is an impartial analysis of Measure C. If you desire a copy of the Measure, please call the elections official's office at 650.312.5222 and a copy will be mailed at no cost to you.

Election Information in Spanish

Election Information in Chinese

San Mateo County Times

• School District Turns to the Voters
• High School Measure Draws Activists' Ire
• San Mateo High plan delayed again

For information about the San Mateo Union High School District

Two years ago, voters in the SMUHSD overwhelmingly approved Measure D, believing that the resulting bonds would finance school modernization at Aragon, Burlingame, Capuchino, Hillsdale, Mills, and San Mateo High Schools. Although these facility improvements were explained in the District's Master Plan, a lawsuit opposing construction of new buildings has resulted in a superior court ruling which now prevents using bond funds for demolition and construction projects, including the removal or replacement of outmoded or unsafe buildings, and construction of new seismically safe facilities and classrooms. This ruling has impacted all six schools.

Each school site had a committee made up of architects, engineers, parents, teachers, and staff who worked together to produce the plans that will result in state-of-the-art high schools across our community. Design of new buildings replicates the best features of buildings being replaced. The Citizen Oversight Committee reviewed each plan and recommended approval to the Board of Trustees. By voting YES ON MEASURE C, voters will ensure that these plans will be implemented with no new bonds or taxes.

We are justifiably proud of the excellent education provided to our students, but this education will suffer if the facility improvements cannot be completed. Please vote YES ON MEASURE C for our community and for our youth.

/s/ Jerry Hill
President, San Mateo County Board of Supervisors

/s/ Sue Lempert
Mayor, City of San Mateo

/s/ Ron Cox
Mayor, City of Foster City

/s/ Al Baccei
President, San Mateo Police Officers Association

/s/ Caroline Shea
Trustee & Past President Board of Trustees
Millbrae Elementary School District

The $137.5 million approved by Measure D was based on SMUHSD's detailed list of priority projects, specifically including limited demolition and construction at all six high schools. The list did not include complete demolition of San Mateo High School. This was brought to the attention of the court, which fairly ruled that voters did not approve "unauthorized" projects # projects not on the priority funding list nor described in Measure D. The wholesale destruction of historic San Mateo High School was not on the list.

The only reason for Measure C is to demolish San Mateo High School - which instead can be safely rehabilitated at substantially less cost than its replacement. But is that what SMUHSD is asking us to approve? No! We are being asked to give blanket approval to demolish whatever SMUHSD wants - at all six high schools.

In 1999 the voters wisely rejected a bond measure because there were no specifics on how the money would be spent. Measure C is yet another attempt to get that unlimited authority. Say NO, as we did in 1999. Enough is enough. Don't give SMUHSD a blank check!

Tell SMUHSD to stop wasting time and money and get on with what voters already approved.

VOTE NO ON MEASURE C. http://www.savesanmateohighschool.org

/s/ Claire Mack
San Mateo Vice Mayor

/s/ Bertha Sanchez
San Mateo Planning Commissioner

/s/ Karen R. Herrel
former San Mateo Planning Commissioner

/s/ Arthur Weiner

/s/ Keith Weber
Save San Mateo High School!

DEMOLITION OF HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT SAN MATEO HIGH SCHOOL (SMHS) is the ONLY reason for this amendment # unnecessary because SMHS can be rehabilitated to meet all modern life safety and program needs, at a price tag that's $6-9 million less than demolition and replacement, according to the School District's own Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

The EIR, prepared by prominent architects and engineers experienced with seismic rehabilitation of historic buildings, determined that SMHS can be safely and economically rehabilitated to meet all State-required safety standards. The State Architect, State Historic Building Safety Board, National Trust for Historic Preservation and the California Preservation Foundation have concurred with this finding. Stanford University's recent seismic retrofit shows how classroom buildings can be made seismically safe while preserving their historic character.

Measure D already allows for repairs, safety upgrades, limited demolition and new construction at all six high school campuses--Aragon, Burlingame, Capuchino, Hillsdale, Mills and San Mateo. Much work is currently underway. Improvements outlined in the Facilities Master Plan, the legally required listing of "projects to be accomplished" with Measure D funds, include:

• Modernization: expand libraries and classrooms to meet State standards and create modern technology-supported instructional space.

• New construction: specifically authorized to build new science classrooms and computer laboratories.

• Renovation: upgrade health, safety and structural systems, plumbing, bathrooms, electrical, heating and ventilation.

VOTE NO ON MEASURE C. DON'T GIVE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT UNLIMITED AUTHORITY TO DEMOLISH SMHS AND ANY SCHOOL!

Additional information: <http://www.savesanmateohighschool.org>

/s/ Claire Mack
San Mateo Vice Mayor

/s/ Bertha Sanchez
San Mateo Planning Commissioner

/s/ Keith Weber
Save San Mateo High School!

And, while Measure C is about all six high schools, prominent architects and engineers, including the State Architect, experienced with not only seismic retrofitting of buildings, but with the design and construction of educationally sound facilities and classrooms, have determined that there is "significant earthquake risk to life safety" in the two San Mateo High School buildings "due to construction to outdated codes". Just retrofitting those buildings would result in reduced instructional space and increased costs, which would reduce funds available for needed modernization at all schools. Only new buildings meet the highest seismic safety, cost controls, and educational standards.

Measure C requires two-thirds vote to pass which will allow the SMUHSD to provide safe, state-of-the-art facilities and classrooms at all six high schools with NO NEW BONDS OR TAXES. Measure C is a YES vote for youth in our community - for generations to come.

/s/ Jackie Speier
California State Senator, 8th District

/s/ Mark Church
San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, 1st District

/s/ Mary Janney
Mayor, City of Burlingame

/s/ Larry Franzella
Mayor, City of San Bruno

/s/ Russ Harter, P.E.
City Council Member, Foster City

The purpose of the election is to submit to the electors of the District the question of whether to amend the bond authorization granted by the voters of the District on November 7, 2000, in order to permit the District to spend the proceeds from the sale of bonds authorized at that election for the additional purposes described in the present ballot measure. No additional bonds and no increase in property taxes would be authorized by approval of this measure.

The information contained herein regarding tax rates is given to comply with Sections 9400 and following of the Elections Code of the State of California. Any bonds issued for the additional purposes authorized by this election would be issued and sold pursuant to all of the terms applicable to the bonds authorized on November 7, 2000, including that the interest on such bonds shall not exceed 12% per annum, and that the number of years the whole or any part of the bonds are to run shall not exceed 40 years from the date of such bonds. Principal of and interest on previously issued bonds and any bonds issued in the future are payable from the proceeds of tax levies made upon the taxable property in the District. In connection with the November 7, 2000 election, the District provided the following estimates as required by law, of the tax rates which would be required to fund the bonds authorized by the voters of the District: The tax rate required to be levied to fund the bond issue during the first fiscal year after the first sale of the bonds (Fiscal Year 2001-02) was estimated to be 1.683 cents per $100 of assessed valuation. The tax rate required to be levied to fund the bond issue during the first fiscal year after the last sale of the bonds (Fiscal Year 2007-08) was estimated to be 1.683 cents per $100 of assessed valuation. The highest tax rate required to be levied to fund the bond issue was estimated to be 1.683 cents per $100 of assessed valuation, which was projected to be the required rate of tax in each year the bonds are outstanding. Approval of the proposition on November 5, 2002, will not increase property tax rates within the District.

The foregoing statement has been approved by the Board of Trustees of the District.

/s/ Thomas Mohr
Superintendent
San Mateo Union High School District