Will Redlands School Bond Survive the Shadow of a Scandal?

In a bid to secure funding for much-needed improvements, the Redlands Unified School District has placed a monumental $500 million school bond, known as Measure D, on the November 5 ballot for local voters. Campaign signs promoting the measure have sprouted across the city, heralding promises of enhanced learning environments. Campaigning for Measure D in Redlands

Mailers flooding the mailboxes of Redlands residents showcase the aspirations behind Measure D, with the Yes on D For Redlands Schools 2024 committee at the helm of the campaign. The materials underscore the dire need to upgrade or replace aging classrooms, playgrounds, and laboratories. Notably, the mailers include a letter from Juan J. Cabral, the district superintendent, which states:

“All of our students deserve to learn in classrooms that are healthy and safe, but over 80% of local schools are more than 60 years old and in need of basic health and safety repairs.”

However, the backdrop to this promising initiative is stained by a troubling history—cases of sexual abuse by teachers within the district have resurfaced, a reality that has seen the district pay out over $45 million in related lawsuits since 2016. The juxtaposition of these funds to potential infrastructural improvements raises complex questions for voters.

A Scandal Overshadowing Progress?

Despite campaign efforts promoting Measure D, many experts are left wondering whether the dark legacy of sexual abuse scandals will influence voter decisions. Christine Stephens, the Redlands Unified communications manager, contends that the bond measure, aimed solely at facility improvements, should be viewed as a separate issue from the sordid history of abuse that has plagued the district.

The impacts of the abuse scandals resonate strongly throughout the community, which comprises more than 20,000 students from Redlands, Loma Linda, Mentone, and beyond. Teacher convictions have drawn scrutiny and accountability from federal and state authorities, which lambasted the district for its initial lack of action. A Southern California News Group investigation revealed that for over a decade, the district had covered up the abuses, stymying investigations and permitting predatory educators to continue their heinous acts. Although reforms were implemented in 2018, many community members remain skeptical. Recently, a board meeting was packed with residents seeking greater accountability from officials over the district’s response to these past transgressions.

Will Voter Sentiment Be Affected?

Renee Van Vechten, a political science professor at the University of Redlands, provided insight into the potential voter psyche as ballots are completed. While the scandal and Measure D are technically “separate issues,” she acknowledged the possibility of voter backlash:

“It’s very possible people will make that connection.”
However, there is a valid argument that many voters may compartmentalize these concerns, focusing solely on the prospective benefits of the bond measure.

Interestingly, no formal opposition campaign has emerged to contest Measure D, which typically serves as a strong indicator of a bond’s likelihood of passing. Marcia Godwin, a professor of public administration at the University of La Verne, noted that for ’no’ votes to gain traction, a well-funded opposition would be needed to draw attention to the past scandals. Currently, the political committee backing Measure D has amassed significant contributions, including $10,000 from a construction workers’ union.

Community Perspectives

For some voters, the scandal’s influence on their choice is moot. Judith Barre, a former elementary school teacher from Redlands, is prepared to cast her ballot against Measure D. Her opposition stems not from the abusive history but from a discontent with the district’s explanations regarding funding needs.

“The sexual abuse issues will not weigh in when I vote on the school bond,” wrote Barre.
Her plea is for administrators to heed the concerns of students and act promptly to curtail inappropriate behaviors.

Conversely, despite the absence of organized dissent against Measure D, individuals like Richard Michael, who opposes various bond measures through his California School Bonds Clearinghouse webpage, believe that the tainted reputation of the district will play a pivotal role in how voters view the bond. He argues the lack of transparency regarding fund allocation could spark skepticism.

Forward Thinking Amidst Past Failures

As community members grapple with this multifaceted issue, some advocates for Measure D are adamant that improvements to school facilities must take precedence. James Verhoeven, a history teacher at Redlands High School, remains hopeful voters can distinguish between past actions and future needs, stating:

“Obviously we can’t ignore what has happened in the past… I hope that the voters can see that those are two different issues.”

Stephen echoed this sentiment, insisting the bond is not a reflection of past failures but a —

“This bond is not about looking back; it’s about moving forward.”

A vote for Measure D entails a property tax increase of $45 per year for each $100,000 of assessed property value, reflecting an investment aimed at safeguarding students with improved infrastructures like safer drinking water, upgraded classrooms, and modernized facilities to foster an effective learning environment.

Conclusion

As the dust settles and ballots are cast, it remains to be seen how deeply the shadow of past abuses influences the vote on Measure D. With a tendency towards high voter turnout in Redlands compared to San Bernardino County, the results could reflect broader sentiments around trust, efficacy, and the possibility of rejuvenation within a beleaguered school district. Voters will ultimately decide whether to invest in a brighter educational future, or instead to confront the scars of a troubled past.

Measure D Summary:

• Bond Amount: $500 million
• Property Tax Increase: $45 per year per $100k assessed property
• Purpose: To improve school conditions while addressing safety concerns.
  For more information, visit the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters.