Measure CL verdict debates
Author: Wes Woods II, Staff Writer
CLAREMONT - Supporters of the city's failed $95 million bond measure said the loss in the polls was probably due to the state of the economy, but opponents were not so sure.
Measure CL, a $95 million bond to upgrade Claremont Unified School District buildings and equipment, received only 39.5 percent support in last week's vote. Claremont property owners would have paid about $45 per $100,000 of assessed value for 30 years.
Michael Seder, co-chairman of the pro-bond Measure CL committee, said the measure failed, in part, because people didn't want to pay additional funds.
Measure CL, a $95 million bond to upgrade Claremont Unified School District buildings and equipment, received only 39.5 percent support in last week's vote. Claremont property owners would have paid about $45 per $100,000 of assessed value for 30 years.
Michael Seder, co-chairman of the pro-bond Measure CL committee, said the measure failed, in part, because people didn't want to pay additional funds.
"They didn't want to have to come out of pocket with it," Seder said. "It's a sentiment not unique to Claremont, but it's out there. The challenge is that it doesn't change the fact we still have this need (for a lack of school technology and building work)."
Joe Farrell, a member of the bond opponent, Claremont Taxpayers for Common Sense, said the failure of the measure was more about a lack of transparency on the part of the school district rather than the economy.
"Either people promoting the bond didn't know the facts or there weren't any facts," Farrell said. "It becomes hard to see what they would spend the money on. I don't think any member of public was aware that they could only borrow $35 million up front."
Claremont Taxpayers for Common Sense volunteers had asked the school district to use better management practices and improve the disclosure of Measure CL projects, said Betty Crocker, a group member and organizer of several No on Measure CL rallies.
"What I believe happened is our community saw a bunch of neighbors, a bunch of regular folks, standing on street corners with No on CL signs," Crocker said. "They asked people to please look at the truth. Please look at the evidence."
Under normal conditions, local revenue measures - such as Measure CL - are commonly approved, said Doug Johnson, a research fellow with Claremont McKenna College's Rose Institute.
In fact, voters in Claremont supported a similar measure in 2000.
"This is definitely a surprisingly large defeat for this measure considering what we usually expect from Claremont," he said.
The defeat could be attributed to a rough year for local bond measures throughout the country as well as Los Angeles County, Johnson said.
"Normally, it's about 70 to 80 percent of these local revenue measures pass," he said. "This year, at best, it was 50 percent. The voters were certainly against all taxes and Claremont just got caught up in that. I think Claremont got caught up in the general anti-tax feeling.
"Times are tough and plus there's a general sense federal taxes are going to have to go up to cover spending planned or under way and that magnifies the usual economic concern over more money coming out of people's pockets," Johnson said.
At Thursday's school board meeting, a district teacher and Superintendent Terry Nichols shared their disappointment at the failure of Measure CL.
"I moved with my family to Claremont because we wanted a community that placed a high value on education," said Kara Evans, an English teacher at Claremont High. "I decided to become an English teacher at Claremont High School because I wanted to serve that community ... although a lack of support for Measure CL makes me question where those ideals" went.
Evans said she and other educators would continue to work under leaky roofs and with poor technology.
"We will continue to teach your children because we do value education," Evans said.
Measure CL was endorsed by the Claremont Faculty Association, Sustainable Claremont, the Claremont Chamber of Commerce and the League of Women Voters of the Claremont Area.
"Even though we're disappointed ... we also recognize education is still a priority in Claremont," Nichols said. "We also honor the fact the community felt strongly" about the issue on both sides.
Claremont Unified officials will certainly need to try a different method if they want a similar bond measure to be passed in the future, Johnson said.
"Whether that's waiting or to come up with a different measure, I don't know," he said.
But the measure's failure could be a positive for the district, Johnson said.
"I think that it's always interesting to see when people turn down tax measures how do voters react to the resulting budget cuts," he said. "Opinions can sway very quickly in some cases once step two of that process takes place."
At Thursday's meeting, Nichols set forth a warning that the issue of fixing the district's schools and updating technology would soon return.
"We have to address our facility at some future date but we will continue to keep our focus on the students," he said.
Joe Farrell, a member of the bond opponent, Claremont Taxpayers for Common Sense, said the failure of the measure was more about a lack of transparency on the part of the school district rather than the economy.
"Either people promoting the bond didn't know the facts or there weren't any facts," Farrell said. "It becomes hard to see what they would spend the money on. I don't think any member of public was aware that they could only borrow $35 million up front."
Claremont Taxpayers for Common Sense volunteers had asked the school district to use better management practices and improve the disclosure of Measure CL projects, said Betty Crocker, a group member and organizer of several No on Measure CL rallies.
"What I believe happened is our community saw a bunch of neighbors, a bunch of regular folks, standing on street corners with No on CL signs," Crocker said. "They asked people to please look at the truth. Please look at the evidence."
Under normal conditions, local revenue measures - such as Measure CL - are commonly approved, said Doug Johnson, a research fellow with Claremont McKenna College's Rose Institute.
In fact, voters in Claremont supported a similar measure in 2000.
"This is definitely a surprisingly large defeat for this measure considering what we usually expect from Claremont," he said.
The defeat could be attributed to a rough year for local bond measures throughout the country as well as Los Angeles County, Johnson said.
"Normally, it's about 70 to 80 percent of these local revenue measures pass," he said. "This year, at best, it was 50 percent. The voters were certainly against all taxes and Claremont just got caught up in that. I think Claremont got caught up in the general anti-tax feeling.
"Times are tough and plus there's a general sense federal taxes are going to have to go up to cover spending planned or under way and that magnifies the usual economic concern over more money coming out of people's pockets," Johnson said.
At Thursday's school board meeting, a district teacher and Superintendent Terry Nichols shared their disappointment at the failure of Measure CL.
"I moved with my family to Claremont because we wanted a community that placed a high value on education," said Kara Evans, an English teacher at Claremont High. "I decided to become an English teacher at Claremont High School because I wanted to serve that community ... although a lack of support for Measure CL makes me question where those ideals" went.
Evans said she and other educators would continue to work under leaky roofs and with poor technology.
"We will continue to teach your children because we do value education," Evans said.
Measure CL was endorsed by the Claremont Faculty Association, Sustainable Claremont, the Claremont Chamber of Commerce and the League of Women Voters of the Claremont Area.
"Even though we're disappointed ... we also recognize education is still a priority in Claremont," Nichols said. "We also honor the fact the community felt strongly" about the issue on both sides.
Claremont Unified officials will certainly need to try a different method if they want a similar bond measure to be passed in the future, Johnson said.
"Whether that's waiting or to come up with a different measure, I don't know," he said.
But the measure's failure could be a positive for the district, Johnson said.
"I think that it's always interesting to see when people turn down tax measures how do voters react to the resulting budget cuts," he said. "Opinions can sway very quickly in some cases once step two of that process takes place."
At Thursday's meeting, Nichols set forth a warning that the issue of fixing the district's schools and updating technology would soon return.
"We have to address our facility at some future date but we will continue to keep our focus on the students," he said.
Leave a comment