Contra Costa college district concedes defeat on Measure G

The Contra Costa Community College District is preparing to continue tightening its belt in the coming budget cycle after Measure G failed to gain the 55% majority threshold necessary to pass in the June 2 primary election.

While the measure gained additional supporters as ballots were counted and ultimately emerged with more than 50% of the vote, it remained clear as of the updated count from the county June 10 that there was no path to victory for the $920 million bond measure that was placed on the ballot with the goal of funding critical capital improvement and maintenance projects.

That loss and other financial challenges facing the district in the local, state and federal landscapes were top of mind for the cabinet, staff, governing board members and other district stakeholders at the June 10 board meeting – including the newly appointed student trustee Nick Bonsanara, who sat at the dais for the first time that evening.

The measure’s defeat was at the center of discussions on a draft budget for the coming fiscal year and proposed raises for cabinet members, which most of them declined.

“I am disappointed that despite major, major efforts, our facilities bond measure did not receive 55% of voter approval last week,” CCCCD Chancellor Mojdeh Mehdizadeh said at that night’s meeting. “While our margins were better, and they looked better even today, as with most county-wide tax measures it just wasn’t enough to get us there.”

Measure G pulled ahead following the initial election night count tally that saw just under 47% of voters in favor of it, with 50.5% voting in favor as of the most recent results released June 12.

While that support was stronger than Measure B, the other county-wide tax measure on the ballot for San Ramon Valley voters on June 2, both succumbed to the same fate amid opposition campaigns from the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association.

“We led the successful fight against Measures B and G, saving Contra Costa Taxpayers $2.63 Billion,” CCTA organizers wrote on their website after ballots were counted.

While the anti-Measure G campaign had called on the district to reconsider the infrastructure maintenance and upgrade needs identified in studies and analyses prior to pursuing the measure, Mehdizadeh emphasized that the bond measure’s failure to pass did not change the need for funding of those projects.

“This outcome is certainly disappointing – depressing in some ways – but it does not diminish the importance of the needs that we have already identified in our facilities plans, and I think we want to be really clear that our commitments to addressing the needs are very much alive, and we need to assess options and opportunities, so we’ll be doing some digging into some data and assessing what our future opportunities are,” Mehdizadeh said.

In the meantime, Mehdizadeh was one of seven administrators to decline salary increases that were proposed in their contract extensions later that night, with raises on the table for a total of 10 cabinet members.

“It takes real leadership to recognize the financial state that we’re in as a state, and then how this is going to affect us as a district, and it takes real leadership to recognize where personally we can each share a little bit in what could be coming, and to voluntarily do it is an act of leadership,” Ward 3 Trustee Rebecca Barrett said.

“What might come in the next year for our employees is not going to be voluntary for them,” she continued. “We’re going to be making the decisions for them, and so at least for us with our positions of power that we have to take opportunities proactively share in the pain just a little bit is an act of courage, and it is an act of leadership, and I am very grateful for those who stepped up and did that.”

Barrett added that the move was something she believed the governing board should look to as an example as it contends with the district’s budget challenges, now without the hope of the $920 million in funding that had been on the line with Measure G.

“It’s not going to right size our $4 million deficit, but it is showing that we have a responsibility too, and so I appreciate your leadership by example, and I would endeavor for us as the trustees to also be following in that example as well,” Barrett said.

Ward 1 Trustee Andy Li echoed that sentiment.

“People do not make this kind of financial sacrifice unless they genuinely care about the institution they serve,” Li said. “They are willing to lead by example, just like Rebecca said.

He added that while many are critical of the high compensation for cabinet members in the district, their pay is “comparable, or in some cases lower than, that of their peers” at other districts in the region.

“As I have said in public many times. I’m so proud of the team in our district,” Li said. “In recognition of their example and my appreciation for their service, I’ll be making a monthly donation of my board stipend to the foundations of our three colleges.”

In addition to looking ahead to the coming fiscal year in its discussion on the draft budget, the governing board was looking toward the district’s next election in November at last week’s meeting, in which it formally called for elections for the Ward 1, Ward 3, and Ward 4 seats.

Danville council to debate appeal over church housing projectJuly 20, 2026 4:46 pm

'Still vulnerable': Patelco sued by fired audit chief alleging retaliation after critical report in wake of cyberattack18 hours ago

Fast-growing wildfire south of Pleasanton prompts evacuation order in Ruby Hill17 hours ago