HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.9.a - Greg Haling - Public comment for item number 3.9.a.ATTENTION: This message originated from outside Butte County. Please exercise judgment before opening
attachments, clicking on links, or replying..
From:Greg Haling
To:Clerk of the Board
Subject:Public comment for item number 3.9.a
Date:Friday, March 21, 2025 11:56:32 AM
Consent Agenda March 25, 2025
Item number 3.9.a Resolution of the Board of Supervisors Authorizing Chico Unified
School District to Sell Bonds Directly
Comments/Questions regarding resolution 3.9.a for Board of Supervisors to consider
and question representatives of CUSD
Emailed to: clerkoftheboard@buttecounty.net on March 21, 2025
Is it possible to get a better understanding of the previous
school bonds and the need to issue/sell new bonds at this time?
Some pertinent points for consideration are detailed below.
In researching past bond measures, there are three for CUSD
and two for Butte College, that are still being assessed as
shown on my property tax bill. There is also information in
regards to previous bond Measures E and K. In 2012, Measure
E authorized CUSD to borrow $78 million to improve/repair
existing schools by extending the term of the previous bond
measure K.
In 2018, CUSD had sold only $15 million of Measure E bonds
as apparently there was not enough unencumbered assessed
property value in the district to sell the rest without increasing
taxes above the permitted limit. I believe this is referring to
proposition 13 which placed a tax rate limit at 1%. So, it
appears that CUSD had to wait for property values to increase
to sell more of Measure E bonds.
So as of 2025, are there still unsold bonds from previous voter
approved measures that have not been used? Can or should
CUSD sell and use those now, as presumably property values
have increased? If they can, why the need to levy more ad
valorem taxes and obligate new bonds?
Also, with the new Trump administration closing the
Department of Education, will this affect the issuance of these
bonds or become a fiscal hardship/responsibility to the
property owners? These bonds will result in more obligations
and increased indebtedness to taxpayers. Is this a prudent
decision to make at this time of such great uncertainty with our
government chaos? Is CUSD looking for a timely advantage to
leverage California matching funds? This may be questionable
given the current state’s huge budget deficit.
Thank you for considering these comments and questions.
P.S. I appreciate the service of BOS members and of Butte
County staff.
Sincerely,
Greg Haling
Chico CA
greg@haling-associates.com