Still “NO” on SBCC’s Measure “P”
By Justin Shores
Contrary to Supporters’ Assurances, Measure P Adds to Taxpayer Burden
The folks running “Yes on Measure P” are conducting a misleading campaign and have doubled down on the lie that the bond will not raise taxes. Even after Lanny Ebenstein of the Santa Barbara Taxpayers Association corrected the record, the campaign sent out a mailer touting his endorsement with an emphasis on the bond helping fund the school “without raising taxes.”
This statement is false, as it increases the tax burden on housing in Santa Barbara County by hundreds of millions of dollars. They also assert that the bonds have strict accountability; that claim is not only laughable, but it has also never stopped them from instantly reallocating funds in the past.
Political donations are tracked on several public portals and can paint a picture of who stands to benefit if what they support wins. Santa Barbara City College’s Measure P has raised $191,200 according to its first financial report. The campaign has 10 donors of $1,000 or more, with 6 coming from construction/architect firms.
The Largest Donors
Biggest by far is the Santa Barbara City College Foundation, having thrown $150,000 into the pot. The SBCC Foundation members have been very active in local media, with many of them writing opinion pieces in support of the bond.
I challenge you to find a letter in support of the bond from someone not connected to them.
The second biggest donor is a design firm – LPA, Inc. – from Irvine, California, with $20,000. LPA Inc.’s website shows their passion for carbon-neutral and net-zero buildings and showcases their large portfolio.
With $5,287.14, Deane & Company from Sacramento is the 3rd biggest donor. It is a campaign finance company and shares the same phone number for the two treasurers. Is it normal for campaign treasurer companies to donate to campaigns they are managing?
Will they charge for their services later?
Griffith and Thornburgh – legal counsel for SBUSD and SBCC – donated $5,000 and was the only other large donor from Santa Barbara besides Kruger, Bensen, and Ziemer Architects, which also donated $5,000.
Another big donor is Kitchell, a construction management company based out of Arizona, donating $5,000. Fonder-Solari, a bond program construction management company, donated $2,500. Garrick Oliver, Founding Principal of obrArchitecture in San Diego, donated $1,500. Cambridge West Partnership LLC, a human resource and technology resource for California Community Colleges, donated $1,000. John A. Martin & Associates Inc., a structural engineer firm from Los Angeles, donated $1,000.
Mismanaged Budgets
These same portals also show what the campaign spends money on. They had only spent $10,401.77 at the time, with $5,000 going to TeamCivX LLC, a California campaign powerhouse. They have only been in business since 2023 but have been very successful in helping pass bonds and measures. Former Biden/Harris and Alex Padilla campaign staff and other experienced political activists make up their team. With the number of mailers and signs we have seen, the next campaign finance filing should have more expenses.
Both campaign treasurers are based in Sacramento. Measure P is part of a statewide push to increase budgets of schools that have been generally fiscally mismanaged. They seem to have a model for increasing budgets: stop spending on infrastructure until it crumbles, and then use the voters’ empathy for safety and education against them.
The Opposition
Who opposes Measure P? Two of SBCC’s current board members – the most fiscally minded – have come out against the bond. They know how it will be used and have taken a stand. Trustee Marsha Croninger’s strong article for the No on P stance should be required reading before voting. Some of the longest community advocates for SBCC are also against the Measure and lament the way the campaign is being run. Spending priorities have been backward, and anyone who has consistently gone to board meetings over the last 10 years knows why.
The Grassroots Campaign
Local community members have printed signs and flyers, created a website with their own money, and spent time spreading their message; theirs is a David and Goliath story. It will be a miracle if they defeat the bond, as polling shows it should pass. Voters care about education, and the misleading campaign will persuade the average voter.
In 2022, every tax measure on the County Ballot was approved by voters except for the City of Guadalupe, many with 60-70% “Yes” votes.
Beginning in 2017 – according to Marsha Croninger’s article –, SBCC reacted to declining revenues and deficits by reducing its yearly budget for building maintenance from two million dollars to $500,000, covering emergency repairs only. "Instead of right-sizing enrollment and revenue, SBCC chose not to maintain its facilities to curb structural deficit spending in its budget,” Ms. Croninger contends.
The Questions
Is this a self-inflicted wound? Did the SBCC Foundation sit and watch the campus deteriorate without jumping into action?
Why is this an emergency now?
Why don’t they fundraise individual projects so we can ensure the money goes to what was intended?
Has the Foundation spent the $25 million donated from Mackenzie Scott on the campus yet? Why not?
Declining Enrollment
Admissions across the state are dropping, and admin costs continue to increase, creating a need for some colleges to downsize and even move to smaller locations. Why not use the land at SBCC for something else that can bring value to the community if the space is not needed anymore?
A Vision For the Future
SBCC has a prime location and prestigious alumni. Fundraising should be a top priority if they are in a deficit and cannot afford basic repairs. Engage the community and get it involved with the vision for the future of the campus. Invite the community to the beautiful setting, provide some entertainment, and ask for donations. Anyone who has experience in high-level donations knows transparency is the most important thing. If philanthropic people know where their money is going and trust what is promised, they will be very generous.
Wasteful Spending
The majority of the SBCC Board of Trustees are progressive liberals, and they have spent millions on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion efforts (DEI). No-bid contracts spending thousands per hour on anti-bias training for teachers who mostly agree with them is excessive. Board President and Democrat Party Central Committee Member Jonathan Abboud states, “There is no amount of money that is too much to spend on Anti-Racism,” when asked about a huge DEI contract he just voted on.
If they really cared about diversity, they would help find a solution to SBUSD’s failure to teach our Hispanic kids how to read English. They would focus on providing impactful education and training for the workforce communities in Santa Barbara and less on a boutique PE building.
We all want SBCC to thrive, but we need to send a message to this board and future boards that fiscal responsibility matters; spending should be focused on infrastructure and direct educational outcomes. Fundraising will show what the community wants to prioritize if individual projects are put up for us to donate or fundraise for.
Santa Barbara Current’s Endorsement List (Nov 5, 2024 Election)
Thanks! Simply stated, our Universities and CC's need to learn the word "Budget." It's polite to say yes to P but someone has to be the adult in the room and say NO.
Justin, you blew it out of the ballpark! We, collectively, are grateful for your sacrifice of time and dedication. As we read this in-depth article, appreciate the many hours of dogged researching that supports this article. His is the face of invested citizenship.