School districts across the Santa Clarita Valley and the state are throwing support behind Proposition 2, a statewide bond measure meant to help renovate and modernize buildings, though not everyone is a believer in its efficiency.  According to the official ballot text language on the California Secretary of State website, the proposition “authorizes $10 billion in general obligation bonds for repair, upgrade, and construction of facilities at K-12 public schools (including charter schools), community colleges, and career technical education programs, including for improvement of health and safety conditions and classroom upgrades.”  Annual audits would be part of the funding process. Of the $10 billion that would be available, $8.5 billion would go to K-12 public school districts and $1.5 billion to community college districts.  Should the proposition pass, there would be increased state costs of about $500 million per year over the next 35 years to repay the bond, according to the Secretary of State.  Those funds would be used to match whatever a school district can offer for a given project, and the state bond funds would not be the sole financial source for projects.  As of Wednesday, the governing boards for the William S. Hart Union High School District, the Newhall School District and the Saugus Union School District have all passed resolutions in support of the proposition. The Santa Clarita Community College District board of trustees, which oversees College of the Canyons, has also pledged its support.  Eric Harnish, spokesman for COC, said there is an estimated $27.5 billion in unmet facilities needs across the state, and there is not enough funding in the state’s budget to meet those needs.  The college currently has about $95 million left in its Measure E bond fund for improving facilities or building new ones, and Harnish said having that money already in hand would help to augment the potential state bond funds.  “If we can leverage those state dollars, then it can extend what we can do with those local dollars,” Harnish said in a phone interview on Tuesday.  Since 2002, COC has received 11 allocations from the state for various scheduled maintenance projects, securing $66.4 million in state funding. That money is planned to help with scheduled maintenance as well as the Performing Arts Center, Hasley Hall, Aliso Hall and Aliso Lab, the east physical education building and the University Center.  Should the proposition pass, Harnish said projects such as the Advanced Technology Center and the student center would be looked at for potentially receiving the matching funds.  However, some local elected officials are questioning if Sacramento can be trusted with doing the right thing when it comes to taxpayer dollars.  Erin Wilson, a member of the Hart district governing board, was the only member of the board to oppose a resolution in support of the proposition. She said in a phone interview on Tuesday that the state had a $100 billion surplus in 2022, one that has now shifted to a $68 billion deficit.  “I assumed that I would agree with that resolution,” Wilson said, “but when I read it, I didn’t see any part of this that makes sense to me, because we’re taking money out of our pockets, as well as our community members, to Sacramento to a governance team that has not been responsible with our funds. They have not proven themselves worthy of greater taxes.”  L.A. County 5th District Supervisor Kathryn Barger echoed those sentiments in a prepared statement sent to The Signal on Tuesday after the Board of Supervisors approved supporting the proposition. Barger abstained from the vote, saying she has “unresolved concerns” about multiple bonds being passed over the years and some classrooms are still not in good condition.  “I abstained because I have unresolved concerns about Proposition 2,” Barger said in the statement. “I hear loud and clear taxpayers’ frustration with these types of bonds being approved year after year, yet they’re still seeing classrooms in disrepair, unreliable air conditioning systems, leaking roofs, outdated plumbing, and more. I’m not convinced this is the best path forward. I prefer to keep school bonds in the hands of local school districts who can apply more of a surgical approach to crafting solutions. I’m not a fan of one-size-fits-all solutions.”  Wilson agreed with Barger that local bonds that support just the schools in a given district are typically better for communities.  “We are receiving less funds than (Los Angeles Unified School District), and we’ve shown that we do a better job of using those funds,” Wilson said.  A bond measure for the Hart district is not currently on the table, but Wilson said one could be necessary in the future to renovate facilities, based on conversations she’s had with district staff.  “If the responsibly falls on the local district, I trust that we will be responsible,” Wilson said.  One local district that has a bond measure on the ballot Nov. 5 is the Saugus district. Measure N would provide $187 million via a $30 per $100,000 assessed value tax per year.  That money would be used to retrofit buildings to make them safer should an earthquake strike in the area, as well as for greater safety and security measures, among other potential projects.  That bond would require 55% of voters to approve it for it to pass.  California voters last approved a statewide bond measure for schools in 2016, which provided $9 billion for construction. That followed multiple successful bond measures, though one was struck down in 2020 that proposed $15 billion being given out to school districts.  Voters have approved $54 billion in bond measure funding since the current formula for state bond proceeds took effect in 1998.  The post School districts supporting Prop. 2, the $10B school construction bond measure  appeared first on Santa Clarita Valley Signal.