Measure Done

In San Gabriel, voters answered concerns of aging schools by reaching into their pockets for $65 million - passing Measure A with nearly 70 percent of the vote.

The bond measure will fund technology upgrades and major facilities upgrades at two schools.

"It showed that the idea of, `we're doing the best we can for the students here,' is a good thing. We had a lot of support for that," said Lee Freeman, San Gabriel Unified School District's board president.

While there was support for the measure throughout the campaign, district officials said they were unsure if it would pass. History shows that San Gabriel residents are reluctant to support school bonds, rejecting four previous attempts in 1993, 1994 and 1998.

In 2002, Measure S, a $46 million bond measure, passed. That funding went to the first phase of
Advertisement
improving schools.

The bulk of Measure A money will fund major classroom upgrades and build new libraries and computer labs at Jefferson Middle School and Gabrielino High School. Jefferson will receive about 40 percent - or $26million - of Measure A money.

Some initial technology work will start during the summer. The district's facilities oversight committee will start to prioritize which schools need immediate attention.

With two bonds totaling more than $100 million passed in just six years, putting another bond up for voter consideration in the next 10 to even 20 years is unlikely, said Susan Parks, district superintendent.

Measure D's victory didn't come as a surprise to most, but its road to victory was rougher than expected.

Strident opposition led by blogger Wayne Lusvardi and political consultant Martin Truitt drew attention through Internet discussions but lacked money to spend until the final days of the campaign.

The margin of support narrowed from two-thirds when absentee ballots were cast to about 56 percent on Tuesday, according to political consultant Fred Register.

Register helped organize the campaign promoting Measure D's passage.

"There were reasonable reasons to oppose this, especially if you're one who believes City Hall spends too much money. But I thought the grounds on which it was attacked were bogus, and ultimately, I think people reached that conclusion," Register said.

But by pointing out what they said were the measure's defects, opponents underscored an embarrassing disconnect between the City Council and its staff at City Hall.

"The matter was brought to us by staff late in the process, and it's conceivable that inadequate time was spent in examining the proposal, so we got off to a bad start with the council," Bogaard said Wednesday.

Bogaard tipped his hat to opponents as "capable people in the community who take seriously their responsibility as citizens to debate the issues."

caroline.an@sgvn.com, todd.ruiz@sgvn.com

(626) 578-6300, Ext. 4494, 4444

www.insidesocal.com/hallwaymonitor