☆ Campbell USD board candidate scrutinizes “Keep schools clean” bond

CUSD board hopeful Vivian Mills critiques the latest-proposed districtwide bond measure: $96 million, to be dedicated to “leaky roofs” and other basic building maintenance. Mills questions the district’s historic lack of accountable spending, and why Measure T is overshadowing constituents’ concerns about student success. Candidates Nguyen, Freedman, Miller, Crownover, and Cohen have not yet replied. An Opp Now exclusive.

Opportunity Now: The Campbell Union School District board has placed Measure T on November’s local ballot. This is a $96,000,000 bond measure whose funds would go toward repairing and updating buildings (the CUSD cites “leaky roofs,” “outdated classrooms,” the need to “[k]eep schools clean,” etc.).

Why is/isn’t this measure helpful and needful for the CUSD to maintain our school buildings? If in favor of this measure, how might you respond to rejoinders wondering if this latest attempt (see also similar measures from 2010 and 2016) will actually solve these issues? If against this measure, how do you think the CUSD should address these problems?

Vivian Mills: The current school board placed Measure T on the ballot — asking for a $96,000,000 bond measure. Is this needed when CUESD already received (and voter approved) a 2016 $72,000,000 bond for the same thing — “repairing leaky roofs & providing disabled access”? Prior to that, in 2010, the board received an additional $150,000,000 to upgrade facilities. Why after six years do they need to repair the roof again? Most roofs, unless poorly constructed, do not need repairs after six years.

Secondly, why didn’t they build ADA-accessible restrooms six years ago when they promised to do that?

Thirdly, shouldn’t the annual operating budget account cover these repairs? Perhaps high priority repairs or maintenance deserve a budget line. This is a huge amount ($24,000,000 more than in 2016) to ask for another bond that we, the taxpayers, will have to pay back with principal and interest. This is like a third mortgage.

Even though the measure doesn’t say that no money will go toward administration, funds generated separately from this bond can be diverted limitlessly to administration. Included on the bond project list “of repairs” was the District Office and the Corporate Yard. These two are not actual classrooms that are being recommended for upgrade.

Lastly, why is there so much attention on this measure instead of investing in improving student academics and achievement? Why isn’t more money diverted for real education for our students? I believe that their priorities of funding are misplaced. The new board needs to regroup, reevaluate, and redisperse funds where they are most needed — in the classroom directly to our children. That is what I would do.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity

Special ReportsJax Oliver