Last December, Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3) surveyed 600 randomly selected voters in the LBCC district who said they were likely to vote in the June election. About 65 percent of the respondents favored the proposal for an $850-million bond to fund primarily infrastructure and construction needs at the college.” captionposition=”left”] Just in time for the June 7 election, the Long Beach City College (LBCC) Board of Trustees announced last week that it will be asking voters in the community-college district to approve an $850-million bond measure. The primary focus of the measure will be to address aging infrastructure.
A press statement released by LBCC outlines several of the school’s needs. Many of the campus buildings were constructed in the 1950s and are in need of being updated, according to the statement. This particular measure is meant to upgrade science, engineering and technology classrooms and labs and make needed repairs to leaking roofs and gas, electrical and sewer lines. In addition, the statement notes that the school plans to improve earthquake safety, campus security and handicapped accessibility.
In a phone interview with the Signal Tribune, Eloy Ortiz Oakley, who serves as LBCC District superintendent-president, was asked about the need for a new measure. He explained that a previous one, known as Measure E, was passed in both 2002 and in 2008. The college’s initial plans for Measure E had anticipated “an ongoing investment” in infrastructure and future buildings by the State of California. However the State did not provide any funding toward these construction costs since that time, he said. The bond did raise more than $600 million toward construction costs, he explained, and a few projects that are scheduled to be completed will be using the remaining funds from Measure E. There are still other projects that need to be done.
“Certainly the recession was a big blow to the State and its ability to fund K-12 and community college construction as well as provide funding for the aging infrastructure,” Ortiz said. “And we certainly understand that. However, you know, the facilities continue to deteriorate, and the longer that goes, the more expensive it will become. So, we’re hoping to be able to deal with that sooner, rather than later.”
Ortiz was asked about the timing of the bond measure, since Long Beach residents will also be deciding on whether they will approve a bond measure for the city that will effectively increase the local sales tax by 1 percent to cover the City’s own infrastructure needs for a period of six years and then drop by one-half of one percent for four additional years. If those voters do approve the sales tax and the tax rates don’t change from LA County’s 9 percent, shoppers in Long Beach will be paying a rate of 10 percent.
Oakley acknowledged the infrastructure needs of the biggest city in the community college district, however he did express his confidence that voters in the district would see how the college has invested well in the growth and modernization of the campus. He did note that residents in Signal Hill, Avalon and parts of Lakewood will also be voting on the LBCC bond measure.
“I think this is a great investment in the local community,” Oakley concluded. “And I’m hopeful that the voters will see it that way as well.”
Tabby Larson, a 20-year old English major at LBCC, is in favor of the school’s bond measure.
“I think having nice facilities just encourages students to want to choose LBCC over other schools, too,” Larson said, adding that when students hear that the campus has the funding and the ability to continue to renovate and construct new buildings, enrollment will increase and current students will be motivated.
She has a laundry list in her own mind of which buildings could really benefit from an upgrade soon: the gym, the pool and classrooms without working air-conditioning units.
Patrick O’Donnell, who serves as the state assemblymember for the 70th District, said he favored LBCC’s ballot measure in June. He noted in a telephone interview that if LBCC’s bond measure passes, there will be possibly more money coming from the State, adding that voters will have a chance to approve an additional statewide bond measure in November.
“The best solution to this is we pass the local bond in June,” O’Donnell said, “and then we support the statewide bond in November.”
If passed, the $9-billion statewide bond will provide for infrastructure needs of schools. About $2 billion of the bond will be set aside for community colleges. Although it’s already approved to be on the November ballot, that state bond measure is firmly opposed by Calif. Governor Jerry Brown.
“I am against the developers’ $9-billion bond,” Brown said in a statement sent to the Signal Tribune and another media source. “It’s a blunderbuss effort that promotes sprawl and squanders money that would be far better spent in low-income communities.”
O’Donnell expressed his support of the state bond measure, explaining there weren’t a lot of other options for the schools to pay for construction if the bonds don’t pass.
“The path to provide for a school facility in California is through bonds,” O’Donnell said, adding that the schools should use the education allocation from the State to teach kids in the classrooms and that voters should support the bond measure to provide the needed money toward the cost of buildings. “What we need to do is provide them adequate facilities so they can educate our future and support our economy.”
