Prop H

PROP H, HOSPITAL MEASURE PASSES OVERWHELMINGLY

 

Statewide ballot initiatives also win approval

By Miriam Raftery

June 4, 2014 (La Mesa) – Voters have overwhelmingly approved Prop H by an 87-13% margin. With 85% of precincts counted. The measure continues Grossmont Healtcare District’s lease with Sharp Healthcare for Grossmont Hospital.

 “The returns indicate that Prop H will strongly pass. The Grossmont Healthcare District Board placed the measure on the ballot so the voters could decide an important issue to the East Region, whether the partnership with Sharp HealthCare should continue,” Barry Jantz, CEO of the Grossmont Healthcare District told ECM. We will work hard to ensure we continue working with Sharp to continue the hospital improvements underway and provide the best patient care for our community."

GROSSMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNOUNCES QUARTERLY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM UPDATES




Projects Throughout East County Funded by Proposition H, Proposition U School Bonds

January 15, 2014 (San Diego's East County) -- Grossmont Union High School District (GUHSD) announced today that significant construction progress continues to be made at campuses throughout the District as part of the Proposition H and U school bond programs.

READER’S EDITORIAL: TO EVERYONE IN THE EAST COUNTY CONCERNED ABOUT EDUCATION

By Bill Weaver



May  24, 2013 (Alpine--originally written May 14, 2013) -- I am disappointed to report that new information has recently surfaced that indicates that Propositions H and U Bond funds have been grossly misused by the GUHSD, and that this misuse has been the subject of a cover-up by the GUHSD Trustees and Administrative staff.  A "smoking gun" has been discovered that points toward unethical and non-transparent behavior by District staff, presumably under the direction of the Trustees.



You will see from the content in the attachment that District bond construction funds have been mismanaged at best, and GUHSD fiscal policies and decision-making are a train wreck. The attachment shows that the District's ongoing bond management practices and accounting procedures have cheated taxpayers and burdened the district with unsustainable district "OPEX" Operating Expenses.

GRAND JURY ISSUES REPORT ON GUHSD AND ALPINE HIGH SCHOOL: FOOL US ONCE, FOOL US TWICE?

 

 

By Miriam Raftery

May 21, 2013 (Alpine) – The San Diego County Grand Jury has issue a report blasting the Grossmont Union High School District (GUHSD) for repeatedly axing plans to build a 12th high school in Alpine despite voters twice approving bond measures to construct the new high school. The report is descriptively titled Grossmont Union High School District—Fool Us Once, Fool Us Twice?

The Grand Jury found that “residents of the GUHSD and the greater Alpine area deserve clarity from the School Board regarding the proposed 12th high school."

The report referenced several past articles published in East County Magazine.

READER'S EDITORIAL: HO, HO, HUMBUG

GUHSD Board Member Jim Kelly led the last 8 years by controlling the Board’s majority; now with a new member, Jim Stieringer, elected, let's review progress of a 12th high school

By Bill Weaver

December 2, 2012 (San Diego's East County)--There is an endless trail of disingenuous acts on behalf the majority on the Grossmont Union High School District (GUHSD) Governing Board; this editorial touches on a few. Let’s reflect on years past. Prop H passed in 2004, authorizing $274 million; the Superintendent and the Board put a 12th new high school in the main summarizing Ballot statement headlining the bond explanation. There was a GUHSD Long Range Facilities Master Plan (LRFMP) dated 2003 that stipulated a 12th high school for "Safety and Overcrowding" reasons.

ALPINE VOTERS TO WEIGH SCHOOL BOND MEASURE PROP H

May 23, 2012 (Alpine) – Alpine voters will decide on the June ballot whether  nearly $12 million in bond monies should be authorized to fund the Alpine Union School District.  The District faces a half million dollars in annual budget cuts due to falling property tax revenues and anticipated cuts in state funding.