The Hollister School District’s Measure M, which proposed a $28.5 million general obligation facilities bond to fix leaky roofs, upgrade classrooms and improve campus security, had the lead in the latest release of election results.
“I just checked online and it appears to be doing well at 59 percent,” said Trustee Patricia Moore at about 9 p.m. Tuesday evening as she looked at the first results. “I hope it holds.”
Measure M needed 55 percent of the public vote to pass. The first release of results had 59.34 percent of voters in favor of the bond, with many mail-in ballots counted but poll and provisional ballots left for later tallying. The unofficial figures released early Wednesday morning at 12:27 a.m. showed all the precincts reporting with the bond holding 61.97 percent of the voters’ approval.
“It was extraordinarily meaningful for our district because it was a very solid margin of success,” Superintendent Gary McIntire told the Free Lance Wednesday morning. “The community is supportive of their schools and of our mission and, hopefully, it’s a reflection of the faith that what we told them we’re going to get done we’re going to do.”
The bond took the lead despite a soft campaign in which parents, trustees and administrators made phone calls to residences and left door hangers at homes starting about a month before Election Day, but didn’t break out banners advertising the bond until last week.
“There’s just been such a small committee,” McIntire told the Free Lance on Monday. “We’ve just had a heck of time getting people to turn out.”
The Measure M Campaign Committee – run independently of the school district – hired campaign consultant Connell Lindh, who advised against purchasing signs for neighborhoods and argued for other more explanatory types of outreach such as phone calls. Committee members acted against their consultant’s advice and purchased six vinyl banners for $585 plus tax last week.
“I think the members of the committee felt it just doesn’t seem right that we don’t have any sort of notice up about the measure,” McIntire said Monday.
The measure’s appearance on the November ballot followed a $42.5 million general obligation facilities bond for San Benito High School, which voters narrowly approved in June. The committee’s campaign consultant did not see the earlier bond as a source of concern for the passage of this one when he spoke with the Free Lance in mid-September. But trustees such as Moore, who is the co-chair of the campaign committee, said she was concerned the public would think this measure was a second bond for the high school.
Moving forward
Some of the preparation for bond funded facility improvements is already place. The district hired two architectural firms in July and trustees approved a list of priority projects at their regularly scheduled board meeting in late October. Now that the bond has the lead, architects will create plans for projects so that they can go before the Division of the State Architect for approval in time for some work to start potentially as early as this summer, McIntire said.
The hope is that some of the $4.7 million in roofing, window systems, and air conditioning and heating projects planned for the district’s oldest campus, R.O. Hardin, could start as early as this summer. The projects at this campus will be funded with a mix of Proposition 39 California Clean Energy Jobs Act and bond funds.
“We’re going to do our best to get some projects started this summer,” McIntire said.
For the latest election results, go to SBCVote.us.
Text of Measure M on the ballot:
To improve conditions, avoid overcrowding, and accommodate growing student enrollment in all elementary and middle schools by upgrading schools, keeping neighborhood schools small and well-maintained, improving school safety and security, providing updated learning technology, maximizing energy efficiency, acquiring, constructing or equipping classrooms, facilities and sites, and bringing all facilities into ADA compliance shall the Hollister School District issue $28,500,000 in bonds at legal rates, with independent citizens’ oversight, annual audits, and no money for administrator’s salaries?
