NVR Logo
Taxpayer group takes aim at NVC bond bid
Supporters: $178M measure is key to college’s future
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Save and Share Share
With the February election around the corner, debate is beginning to stir over the Napa Valley College’s $178.4 million construction bond measure.

NVC President Chris McCarthy said he is confident that the college will receive the endorsement of several local organizations, such as the Napa and American Canyon chambers of commerce. But some groups are already beginning to circulate materials against the bond. One group in particular, the Napa Valley Taxpayers Alliance, is taking a formal position: “Vote No on Measure L.”
The bond measure, which will be on the February ballot, comes five years after voters approved a $133.8 million bond for the college. The bond fell $70 million short “in today’s dollars” toward completing approved projects, said McCarthy, due to inflation and an unprecedented rise in construction costs. Measure L, if passed, would provide $115 million for projects already approved by voters in 2002, and $63 million for new projects.

Michael Haley, president of the NVTA, calls the bond measure “ridiculous.”
“The biggest concern that I have with it is there are so many pressing needs right now for taxpayers,” he said, adding, “When you have taxpayers in Napa that can’t afford to fix the streets, and we’re paying for very expensive schooling … it just gets to be a little ridiculous.”

Napa Republican Party President Janet Kirtlink, who said she is not taking a formal position on the issue, agrees that “if they can’t fix our streets around here and make them look better, why should we vote for more taxes for anything until that happens?” The Napa Republican Party will vote in January on its official position on the issue.
McCarthy said the issue comes down to how important the quality of local higher education is to Napa residents.

“We’re not trying to pit the college against other community needs,” he said, “but the college is a vital resource for the community. ... I think a thriving community in part depends on a thriving college.”

NVC trustee and 2007 Board President Michael Baldini said that an investment in the college is an investment in the community as a whole. “This is our town, this is our valued community,” he said. “What we put into this community at all levels, the rewards will flow back into the community.”

But Haley doubts the college’s ability to manage funds responsibly, as demonstrated by its inability to complete approved projects with funds from the 2002 bond.

Said Leon Brauning, member of the NVTA and Napa Republican Party, “Cost overruns of $70 million seem unconscionable and a waste of taxpayer money. ... I think we need to have much more care taken of taxpayer dollars.”

McCarthy points out that the independent citizens oversight committee, which is required to oversee spending of bond funds, “has commended us for the way we’ve spent money.”

“What we don’t have control over,” he said, “is the cost of construction and inflation.” Unexpected inflation and rising construction costs in the wake of disasters like Hurricane Katrina, he said, “are what amount to the shortfall.”

And NVC is not alone in its struggle, said McCarthy. “Fourteen community colleges in the state have already gone out for a second bond because of this problem.”

It’s not just about completing approved projects, though, said Haley. The college is now asking for $63 million in new projects on top of the cost of completing what was already approved in 2002. “I don’t think it’s justified at all,” he said.

“They’re programs the community is asking for,” said McCarthy. With the fast pace of changing technology, “it’s a different world than it was five years ago. … The community is asking us to develop programs for current needs as well as future needs,” he said.

Brauning asked in a letter distributed to members of the NVTA and Napa Republican Party, “With four school bonds already on our taxes ... when do we say stop?”

“It’s an important question,” said McCarthy. What it comes down to, he said, is “What kind of college do you want? … Is it an investment you want to make?” McCarthy said, “We have to put this important decision in front of the community. If not, we’re not doing out jobs.”
12 comment(s)

napablogger wrote on Dec 15, 2007 2:17 AM:

" What I said was ridiculous was building yet a second new theater and television engineering studio when we are hundreds of millions short on basic road maintenance and other infrastructure needs. And you have to consider all the things that the taxpayers have to pay for, it is all coming out of the same wallets. Other needs ARE pitted against the college whether McCarthy likes it or not. That is just the reality that every homeowner in Napa has to face, you have to set priorities. Tax funds are not unlimited. The college should think about higher tuition for kids who want to go to college to sing in a choir or take classes on cell phone photography or whatever other unemployable hobbies they want to pursue. I don't think the bond itself is ridiculous, just some of the things they are requesting as part of it. I also think the amount is very high. In Santa Clara they are making plans to build a huge new state of the art stadium for the Giants---cost $154 million. Less than the second bond for construction at NVC in five years. "

jwk wrote on Dec 15, 2007 4:06 AM:

" We are taxed to death here in this County, State and Country for that matter. We need to focus on our infastructure, ie; Roads & Sidewalks, Police & Fire services. Maybe somehow we could get the "Mighty Tourist Dollars" to support the JC?? I know many people who are struggling with their current Property Taxes. What exactly does a person get for $600.00 a month anyway? "

Sandra wrote on Dec 15, 2007 8:37 AM:

" "McCarthy said the issue comes down to how important the quality of local higher education is to Napa residents." Oh please, if the college really cared about education they would get rid of many of the inadequate teachers, and promote those who know how to teach. If the college really cared about the quality of its school, they wouldn't put things in one year and redo them the next. If they really cared about the students they would focus less on being politically correct and get down to the business of education. "

kevin wrote on Dec 15, 2007 9:56 AM:

" Every other construction project in the world has been affected by the high costs of materials. Everyone else has to deal with it by implementing cost control measures or budget cuts. They don't have the option of simply floating yet another huge bond measure. I don't blame McCarthy for trying, the only thing more fun than spending money is spending OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY... "

mikeb wrote on Dec 15, 2007 11:31 AM:

" Lest we forget, this new proposed Bond measure totals the Bonds requested by NVC to $311,000,000 in just 5 years. As 'napablogger' attempted to cite, that's more than the entire construction cost for the proposed new 49ers stadium in Santa Clara. There is something seriously wrong going on here. For $311,000,000 you could bulldoze and rebuild the entire NVC campus 5 times over! The NVC improvement project needs a complete audit and the Grand Jury needs to look into where the first $115,000,000 million went, and who this next $178,000,000 is earmarked for. "

Concerned Citizen wrote on Dec 15, 2007 11:54 AM:

" It is insane to even consider adding yet another expense to the homeowners' property tax obligation. And that is exactly what will happen should this absurd, ridiculous, bond "needed" (?) as a result of poor financial planning and constraint; pass. Enough of dunning homeowners for what should be a pay by fee, pay as you go basis. Most students at NCC are older, employed or back in school because they want to be; as a form of entertainment. Let those adults pay for their decision to attend classes. "

Musikluvr wrote on Dec 15, 2007 6:12 PM:

" A $70 million shortfall is 50% of the original bond of $133.8 Million in just 2 or 3 years. What family or business could stay out of bankruptcy blowing money like that? What I want to see is the detailed plan the college trustees voted on in November when they decided to ask for another $178 million. I'd like to see exactly how the money is planned to be spent, how they will protect us from more cost overruns, how they are going to fund the ongoing maintenance and replacement reserves so our grand kids won't be paying for todays repairs again with 30 year bonds. i would like to see that the contractors and architects who failed and allowed huge cost overruns are not going to be included in the new plan. I would like to see that the contractors and unions who make huge contributions to the college campaign fund are given no priority. But, unfortunately I know they have no such detailed plan. "

doscentavos wrote on Dec 15, 2007 7:12 PM:

" The soaring costs are ridiculous. The NVC Board knew from the beginning they didn't have enough money to complete the project but they plugged on. Insane and thoroughly fiscally irresponsible. "

xmrs09 wrote on Dec 15, 2007 9:57 PM:

" Maybe I missed it in the story but how much will this bond cost each taxpayer annually, and for how long? "

Rocco wrote on Dec 15, 2007 10:49 PM:

" Enough is enough! Not another cent. "

Tangent wrote on Dec 15, 2007 10:58 PM:

" napablogger and others: A couple of things to keep in mind: enrollment fees at our local college do not go to directly to the college, they go to the state and are redistributed to all community colleges based on enrollment according to the convoluted equations used by the state. The college could raise fees by $30 per unit and not see a single extra cent in revenue. Second, the college does not primarily provide space for people pursuing "hobbies", they are the gateway school for our local students transferring to four-year schools; they educate people who work in our hospitality and service industries in the valley; they train our nurses and paramedics; they train and find jobs for students in welding, machine tool technology; they train our Respiratory Therapists and Pscyh Techs for Napa State. They perform many essential functions beyond the nonsense you've floated about "cell phone photograpy" and "choir." Taking on the burden of a new bond deserves serious consideration and sober reflection, not glib dismissals based on a poor understanding of the issues at hand. "

sickothis wrote on Dec 15, 2007 11:15 PM:

" Mr. Haley - weren't you responsible for killing the sales tax increase that would have help pay to fix our roads? Yes, I believe you were. So to now claim that the college shouldn't get funding because we don't have the money to fix the roads is disingenuous at best. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy