Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1974/10/01 Item 04 AGENDA ITEM NO. [ 4 CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF: October 1, 1974 ITEM TITLE: Resolution - Supporting Proposition 1 on the November 5 Statewide Ballot (The School Earthquake Safety and Building Aid Bond Issue) INITIATED BY : City Council BACKGROUND On August 29, 1974, Howard P. Allen, State Chairman (Californians for Schools Proposition 1) wrote a letter asking the Council to endorse Proposition 1. The fact sheet pertaining to this request is attached. ATTACHED: Resolution Pc] Ordinance [ ] Agreement [ ] Plat [ ] See EXHIBITS ~] No.1, 2 f Financial Statement: N.A. Commission-Board Recommendation: N.A. Department Head Recommendation: N. A. City Manager Recommendation: N~A. /( 7Y7!P ~ r Californians for Schools PROPOSITION i ate Headquarters: 5900 Wilshire Boulevard lite 2750, Los Angeles 90036 l3/931-6301 Honorary Chairman: Governor Ronald Reagan Honorary Co-Chairmen: Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Houston I. Flournoy, Wilson C. Riles .~'1 I Jrthern California Headquarters: 150 Post Street lite 750, San Francisco 94108 ~5/362-5173 ; ! 1- '..' l: ! !/ r · I" f"l ~ !} L Nard P. Allen, State Chairman Jbert W. Ford, Treasurer/Price Waterhouse & Co. ecutive Committee: ward H. Ballard, M.D. :phen C. Bilheimer ;hop H. Hartford Brookins mund G. "Pat" Brown :tor M. Carter v. Charles S. Cassassa, S.J. Jart Davis Howard Edgerton 11 Fletcher 2d L. Hartley eston Hotchkis 's. H. H. Kodani mes S. Lee nest J. Loebbecke ul A. Miller seph N. Mitchell ~orge F. Moody ::hard M. Pittenger Ithony P. Rios J. Rodriguez ward Sanders 'S. Leslie N. Shaw 's. Lennart Swenson 'nard J. Toll . Maynard J. Toll iln V. Vaughn Iymond L. Watson 163 August 29, 1974 j (1.. ~~l. A.; u t, L) It. ~ , , ~"D ~ I' j'.,\., ~ ,; ......J I'~ ", j fI,J.) > , \i " r: ,J.~J.i.;J. '! ' <l ') i "i'if} j ~1 , '$ . i :; J,'l.; Mr. Jolm R. Thomson, City Hall 276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista, Calif. City Manager Dear Mr. Thomson: Thousands of California children are forced to attend school in unsafe classrooms. Thousands of others struggle to learn in classrooms with too many children in them for even minimal education. Proposition I on the November 5th statewide ballot will h~ affected school.~i~~~_de~l with these critical s~~~t.~.ons. First, it provides$50 million in low-cost state loans to those districts which must abandon or re- build school buildings that would be unsafe in future earthquakes. The deadline for abandonment, under the Field Act, is June 30, 1975. Second, Proposition 1 provide~ $100 million in loans for school districts which have grown so rapidly that their need for schools is outstripping local bonding capabilities. More details about this critically needed measure are in the enclosed fact sheet. We hope that after reviewing it, y'g\}!.,~9.Q~Y ti& agre~~. that Propos~tion 1 is a m&1ter of great uro:ency, and will formally endorse the, mea.sure as soon as possible. A--s'ugges~-d resolution is eI!clos~. HPA:ef Sincerely, ~tPdL award P. Allen State Chairman ....<':." \ ^"" \....... :\ lP.'f~ ~ ," ~,'f;,iO." '~":\~~'~ , " <\1 ,,,/ ',~'I(' "'?1 9 " );0 . /;'\ 1,.."'). ">\ r '.' '.",~~ ~ . '\, , " i, i~~' _. .__.,"__........,..___~_.._ ...._ ...~"_....__.._.__.'>___._,,~.."'._,"'.h..."__~.__..._..;~'~,";~".,........""";..,,_...... -.,<" Lo\,fornians for.Scoools PROPOSITION i ~te Headquarters: 5900 Wilshire Boulevard ite 2750, Los Angeles 90036 3/931-6301 Irthern California Headquarters: 150 Post Street Ite 750, San Francisco 94108 "'/362-5173 Honorary Chairman: Governor Ronald Reagan Honorary Co-Chairmen: Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Houston I. Flournoy, Wilson C. Riles Nard P. Allen, State Chairman Ibert W. Ford, Treasurer/Price Waterhouse & Co. ,cutive Committee: FACT SHEET -- PROPOSITION 1 Nard H. Ballard, M.D. .phen C Bilheimer ,hop H. Hartford Brookins 'Tlund G. "Pat" Brown tor M. Carter v. Charles S. Cassassa, S.J. lart Davis ~oward Edgerton n Fletcher :d L. Hartley ~ston Hotchkis s. H. H. Kodani nes S. Lee -lest J. Loebbecke ul A. Miller ;eph N. Mitchell orge F. Moody :hard M. Pittenger thony P. Rios I. Rodriguez ward Sanders s. Leslie N. Shaw ~ Lennart Swenson ard J. Toll . Maynard J. Toll ln V. Vaughn ymond L. Watson School Earthquake Safety & Building Aid Bond Measure on the Nov. 5, 1974 Statewide Ballot WHAT IS PROPOSITION I? Proposition 1 will provide $150 million in low-cost state loans. One third will be loaned to school districts to replace or strengthen school buildings that would endanger the lives of our children in coming earthquakes. The balance will be loaned to districts which urgently need more classrooms because of rapid population growth, but have ex- hausted local financing resources. This continues a nationally ac- claimed California building aid program which has helped financially~ strapped school districts since 1952. Matching funds from local districts will raise the total value of Proposition 1 school construction to $270 million. WHY IS PROPOSITION 1 NEEDED RIGHT NOW? Because by July 1, 1975 -- only months away -- any school building failing to meet minimum structural standards for earthquake safety can no longer be used. This is state law under the Field Act of 1933, drafted after the catastrophic Long Beach earthquake of that year. Some schools built before then are still not safe, and their districts simply cannot afford the required construction. They must be -,._."..~--~. ,.-.. .- ,-') k' 1- r-:y" t, / '1/I'iL. 8/7 /74 .163 FACT SHEET -- PROPOSITIQN 1 PAGE 2 abandoned by the July 1 deadline, because, as the experts agree, "protection from earthquake dangers is virtually nonexistent in these old schools." Unless low-cost state loans make it possible to strengthen or replace these buildings, the result can only be overcrowding, poorer quality education, and, eventually, higher taxes. Other districts already suffer from educational handicaps because of rapid population growth that has pushed them to the limits of their legal bonding ability. Only low-cost loans made possible by the greater bonding capability of the state can finance the classrooms so critically needed in these districts. WHAT IS THE LIKELIHOOD OF ANOTHER EARTHQUAKE IN CALIFORNIA? Experts agree that it is only a matter of time. California's great San Andreas Fault is stretched out like a taut rubber band. It will give sooner or later, as will other stresses in the earth's crust. Another great tremor in the Los Angeles area, for example, would cause between $15 and $20 billion in property damage alone. Loss of life could be staggering. Imagine the injuries and deaths if the Los Angeles quake of February 1971 had struck not at 6 a.m. but during school hours. WHAT LIMITS ARE IMPOSED ON THE USE OF FUNDS? Financially-strapped districts must prove that they are bonded to within 95% of their legal limits, and show an urgent need for more classrooms under strict state requirements. Building costs cannot exceed state allowances, and new building area is limited by state standards. Earthquake safety funds will be lent only to districts supplying 20% to 75% of the cost of their projects themselves, depending on the ability of the district to do the job from its own tax resources. ,..".,."... ...u"".;......,...~._._~<-....-.~. '.,_ """__~_,_,,,_-,,,,_,_,,,,,_,~""_""'~_'_""""_'_'_"__'~'''''_.___ ~- . ') -I> -; j/, / A( ,/ _', T\:, ;' t:.' FACT SHEET - PROPOSITION 1 PAGE 3 WILL TAXPAYERS IN DISTRICTS WITHOUT THE NEED FOR STATE FUNDS HAVE TO INCREASE THEIR LOCAL TAXES TO BEAR BOND REPAYMENT COSTS? Absolutely not. Only those districts which borrow from the state will be obligated to pay back these low-cost loans. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE BONDS FOR EARTHQUAKE SAFETY THAT WERE APPROVED IN 19721 That $250 million fell short of the mark for an all-too-familiar reason: inflation. Construction costs have been skyrocketing. But inflation isn't going to stop the next earthquake. That's why Proposition 1 must supply the funds essential to complete the job of making our schools safe, and to head off further crowding in our classrooms. WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF PROPOSITION 1 FAILS? There is no realistic alternative to Proposition 1. Unsafe classrooms would have to be abandoned, with no provision for educational facilities for the children removed. In rapid growth areas, no additional classrooms will be available, but the need for them will continue to increase. At the same time, construction costs will continue to rise because of inflation. WHO IS SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 11 This measure has the support of the widest possible cross-section of responsible organizations throughout the state, including leaders of both political parties, organized labor, chambers of commerce, women's organizations, minority and church groups, educational leaders, and thousands of others concerned with our children's safety and well-being. II II II II ,..-""---..-........ / --I. Y {; / !^1 It?