Editor’s note: The following is a letter to the editor. The opinions expressed in this letter are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect those of The Mendocino Voice. If you would like to submit a letter to the editor feel free to write to info@mendovoice.com.
Dear Editor:
As a resident of Redwood Valley, a taxpayer of Mendocino County and a father of two middle-school kids in the public schools here, I’m voting Yes on Measure A.
Chances are good that if you have ever been to the local hospital, if a firefighter has ever been to your home or you have ever had to call 911, you have been served by a former Mendocino College student. You’ve likely seen a show at the theatre, got plants from the Ag Department’s twice-yearly sales, or maybe your high-school-aged child is attending classes there right now, earning college credit through the Middle College program.
Mendocino College is one of the most important institutions in our region, and it has earned our support through 50+ years of service. Voting Yes on Measure A supports Mendocino College.
The college’s current nursing students are sitting in portable classrooms that were bought used in 1973, where they housed the first decade of classes at the Redwood Empire Fairgrounds. In 1983, the college bought the old sheep farm on Hensey Creek Road, and those same portable classrooms were then trucked across town, up the road and placed where they still sit today. Currently, firefighting students are scattered across portable classrooms, parking lot demonstrations, and various neighboring fire stations, when space allows. Science classrooms are not large enough to seat all the students who enroll.
Despite these challenges, the district has made it all work and made it work well, graduating thousands of students with skills and education to obtain quality jobs or to transfer to four-year universities. These are our children, this is our community and this is our college — and I believe that we can do better. With the funds raised through Measure A, we can do better.
Our firefighters and EMTs can have a dedicated learning space to call their own. We can educate the next generation of skilled tradesworkers — electricians, carpenters, plumbers, roofers. We can build new science classrooms. Our nurses can have instructional spaces built in this century, without leaking roofs. We can support our community, and I urge my neighbors to do so.
Vote Yes on Measure A.
Mac Lojowsky
Redwood Valley
We are training nurses here but they drive to Santa Rosa where the pay is better.
The State, county and cities get more than enough money. MeasuredA targets property owners whose property taxes will increase for decades if Mmeasure A passes. If measure A is good for the entire community, let the entire community pay for the services and infrastructure through increased sales tax. Better yet, Vote No on Measure A and force State and local government to reprioritize how they send our tax dollars and learn to livevwithin their means
Another attempt to get around Prop 13 by having the voters approve a new property tax. Renters always vote for these, nothing to lose…
I say hell No on A. The only people who will vote Yes on A are those who work for the Mendo Lake Community College, so their salaries can continue to be paid, and people gullible enough to believe what firefighters and nurses vote Yes on. I pay too much in property taxes to this county as is, including a shit load to a similar measure for the UUSD bond previously passed by voters. I give enough money to support this community and county with my hard earned tax dollars, so I will vote No On A, and say Noona my money!
Isn’t this guy the director of buildings at the college? Of course he’ll vote yes on A. Probably voting for his own raise. Playing our heart strings about our children. Of course we all want more for our college. Its all we have. But these measures always just line the big guy’s pockets, we’d be lucky to get 1 new building out of it.
A simple way to learn more about Measure A is to go to http://www.mendocino.edu/measurea . Lots of factual information on the whats, whys, and hows for those who want to be informed voters.
Hi Cody,
Are the costs on the property owners merely estimates or actual raw calculations used by the tax office?
I ask because the Ukiah Unified Bond which passed in 2020 is set up in a very similar way to the current Community college fund being proposed. Currently, I’m paying close to $975 in the 2026- 2027 year to the Ukiah Unified Bond. Much higher than the calculation that was told to voters back in 2020. Given my home value and what the current bond initially proposed, my tax bill for the Ukiah Unified Bond should be more like $260-270 for the 2026 – 2027 year.
So I ask, are these cost formulas merely estimates and based on assumptions? Or will they actually follow the calculation your bond is currently proposing?
Math it:
My information comes from the Sample Ballot & Voter Information Pamphlet (SB&VIP) – Statewide Primary Election Tuesday 6/2/26 and a Google search on CA community college bond tax rate limits.
SB&VIP
1) “2. The best estimate of the highest tax rate that would be required to be levied to fund this bond issue, for each year that bonds are outstanding, based on estimated assessed valuations available at the time of filing this statement, is $24.00 per $100,000 (2.4¢ per $100) of assessed valuation, which is projected to be the same in every fiscal year the bonds remain outstanding.” [Page 23A3]
2) Google Search: california constitution and community college bond rates
Per the California Constitution, California community college “Tax Rate Limits: Local bond rates are restricted. Under Proposition 39 [2000], the maximum tax rate levied for a single community college bond election cannot exceed ($25) per ($100,000).”
3) The tax rate is constant. The county’s property assessment value can be variable.
Here’s the link to Sample Ballot & Voter Information Pamphlet (SB&VIP) – Statewide Primary Election Tuesday 6/2/26:
https://www.mendocinocounty.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/77302/639122975153670000
Mac Lojowsky is the “Director of Facilities Planning, Operations and Sustainability ” at Mendo. The fact he hid that makes me question what else he would prefer we don’t see. Bad look, and the fact that “the district has made it all work and made it work well, graduating thousands of students with skills and education to obtain quality jobs or to transfer to four-year universities.” makes me wonder if maybe it’s the Admin that need to get trimmed back if you are hurting for money.
I agree with all the other comments. Measure A is a terrible idea. They are just being greedy. I understand it isn’t just for facilities and actually includes some operating expenses like staff salaries. Who in the right mind would pay for current operating expenses out of a bond that will cost more than twice what we get over the pay-back period? No one with any sense. Bonds like these are really poor vehicles for funding facilities. A simple parcel tax without any debt attached to it would have been fine but not this foolish money-grab.
This happened before: we thought a vote meant money was going to improve our schools and all we got was fences that make our schools look like jails. Same shitty buildings, same phone addicted kids.
The state seldom provides specific funding for school construction, rehabilitation or maintenance. Schools are forced to carve maintenance funds out of their state operating allocation.
Occasionally state voters pass a school bond which provides MATCHING FUNDS for rehabilitation (modernization) and school construction. State bonds usually earmark a small percentage of the money for Community College projects but the larger balance is for K-12 schools. The last few bonds were over-subscribed the day they were approved by the voters due to long waiting lists of applications. Just making it to the waiting list requires a substantial investment in plans and approvals, in advance, including proof that the district already has the matching funds, with no guarantee that the request will ever be funded.
Yes, it would be easier if communities weren’t forced to pay so much of the cost to have local education, but apparently if we don’t who will? Certainly not the federal government, they seldom did even when we had a US Department of Education.
I should have included that the rules that apply to this Bond, are extremely strict.
1. The district is required to list everything that they COULD POSSIBLY need to spend the bond money in the bond language. If it’s not on the list, it’s not eligible for funding. Thus the lengthy list.
2. A Bond oversight committee is required to review all expenditures and an annual audit is required. Another operating expense.
3. Finally, payment of salaries is specifically forbidden by law for this type of bond. So Mr Lojowski is not seeking money for himself, he is seeking funds to improve your Community College.
4. Inspirational music completes the above list.