The Morgan Hill Unified School District is exploring whether to ask voters to approve a new bond and parcel tax as soon as November 2026, aiming to generate cash for campus improvements while providing a local revenue cushion against an uncertain funding future.
District officials have engaged financial and legal consultants to advise on the potential measures, though no specific numbers have yet been floated.
“We have no significant local revenue sources,” said John Horner, MHUSD’s Board of Education president, explaining that the majority of funding for the district is determined by the state and federal government.
To augment this funding, “most school districts in our county have a parcel tax of one kind or another,” Horner said. “Morgan Hill Unified is one of the lowest revenue per student school districts in our area, so we are looking at ways to address that fact.”
The dual approach reflects two distinct needs. A bond would provide one-time funds for facility improvements, while a parcel tax would provide ongoing operational funding to avoid staff cuts. Under California law, bond money can only be used for facilities, not salaries.
Horner said several district campuses face significant facility needs, with some teachers working in portable classrooms that have stood for more than 30 years.
“We have teachers now that are teaching in ‘temporary’ portables that they went to second grade in themselves,” Horner said. “The teachers come and remind us, and they’re like, ‘I love the nostalgia, but this was a temporary portable when I was in second grade, and now I have a college masters degree and am in my fourth year of teaching. How can this still be here?’”
The district recently completed the final projects funded by Measure G, a $198.24 million bond passed in 2012 that funded a near complete rebuild of Britton Middle School among smaller projects at other campuses. However, aging facilities including P.A. Walsh, Martin Murphy, Los Paseos and Live Oak High School still need upgrades.
“We have a facilities master plan that goes into great detail regarding, to meet modern standards, what would need to be done at every campus, but that adds up to a billion dollars,” Horner said. “There’s no way we would ask for approval for the complete wish list.”
Priorities include replacing aging portables with permanent classrooms, upgrading career and technical education spaces, and improving energy efficiency to offset the soaring cost of utilities that cost the district more than $5 million annually for gas and electricity, according to district staff.
The parcel tax would aim to prevent staffing reductions as the district faces budget deficits following the end of one-time COVID funds.
“Eighty-five percent of the money we spend, we spend on people,” Horner said. “Every time you cut positions, not only does that have an impact on the people who don’t have that job any more, it has a huge impact on our ability to deliver services to students.”
Dale Scott, a financial advisor working with the district, outlined two possible structures for a parcel tax at an Oct. 23 board meeting. Under California law, districts can either charge a flat rate per parcel, regardless of property size, or assess based on the total square footage of any improved structures on a given parcel.
Parcel taxes require a two-thirds vote, compared to 55% for bonds. Parcel taxes are also distinct from bonds in that the district could offer exemptions, including for seniors, if built into the ballot language.
At least one resident has voiced strong opposition to the potential measure. Local retiree and vocal tax critic Chris Robell urged the board not to approve a contract with legal advisors, intended to lay the groundwork for a potential measure, during public comment at the Nov. 13 meeting, arguing the district was moving too quickly.
“It seems like you’ve already made the decision to walk down pursuing a tax, a new tax, for a bond measure,” Robell said. “It seems to me it is the cart before the horse.”
Robell called bonds “a very inefficient use of capital” and said the district should focus on budget cuts before asking taxpayers for more money, suggesting reductions like eliminating seventh-period classes and gutting wellness programs.
“I know these are painful, but those are the kind of things you have to do first before you ask taxpayers for more money,” Robell said.
School bond measures have performed well historically in Santa Clara County, with 100% of K-12 bond measures having passed during presidential or gubernatorial elections since 2002. Parcel taxes, which require a significantly higher vote threshold, have been more difficult to pass, with a 65% success rate.
The district plans to conduct voter surveys early next year to gauge support before making final decisions about placing measures on the November 2026 ballot.
If a parcel tax is selected to raise money, then, only property owner should be the only ones allowed to on the measure and NOT renters. That is the only fair way to proceed.
Would you want someone who doesn’t own a car to be able tell you what color cars should be to be able to be driven on the local roads? Think about it.