Bond Defeats Another Setback for CSUN : Polls: Voters turn down $2-billion earthquake relief measure and $900-million higher education bond issue, funds the university needs to rebuild after Jan. 17 quake.

Cal State Northridge, still trying to recover from the January temblor, endured an insult atop its injuries Wednesday with the defeat of statewide bond measures that would have helped its rebuilding effort as well as funded new facilities.

The university is relying on federal disaster funds to pay 90% of its $350-million earthquake recovery costs but needs the state to kick in the remaining 10%. Tuesday’s sound defeat of Proposition 1A, the $2-billion earthquake relief measure, may hinder the state’s ability to raise its share, university officials said.

“We’re well on our way to recovering from the earthquake in terms of repair and getting back into the classrooms. The only thing that could slow us down at this point is (the situation with) state or federal funding,” CSUN spokesman Bruce Erickson said. “We’re taking them at their word that they’ll help us.”

Voters also torpedoed Proposition 1C, a $900-million higher education bond issue, by 53% to 47%, denying CSUN an extra $27 million it would have devoted to campus modernizations in the coming year. The money was to erect a new central utilities plant, equip the university’s new engineering wing and strengthen the Sierra Tower building’s ability to withstand a future temblor.

Now, the future of those plans--as well as projects worth $34 million that were to be covered by the second year of the bond issue--is in doubt.

“Those are in limbo,” Erickson said. “There’s no other obvious (funding) alternative at this point.”

As at CSUN, most of the projects statewide to be funded by Proposition 1C involved seismic strengthening, modernizing facilities and making buildings accessible to disabled students. Gov. Pete Wilson said Wednesday that state officials would examine whether other sources of money might be available to help with the retrofitting of public campuses.

“I think what we’re going to find is there is sufficient unused bonding for that purpose to take care of the retrofit of the schools,” Wilson said.

The rejection of Proposition 1C also dealt a blow to community colleges in the San Fernando and surrounding valleys, which had hoped for $16 million in bond money to upgrade buildings and free up other funds to construct more classrooms.

At College of the Canyons in Santa Clarita, nearly $6 million was to be applied toward erecting a new utilities plant and outfitting a new fine arts building and library.

Both the fine arts building and the library are to begin construction this summer with previously approved funds but now stand in danger of sitting empty when finished because of a lack of funds to furnish and power them.

“It’s a very serious issue for us,” said Dianne van Hook, superintendent-president of the college. “We have been turning away 3- to 4,000 students a semester, and we’re out of space. . . . These two buildings were going to help us make big strides in accommodating them.”

The defeat of Proposition 1C follows a trend of declining support for higher-education bond measures over the past several years. Although four of five such measures have been approved in California since 1986, the share of voters favoring them has dwindled.

“When bond issues come up now, I think they come under much greater scrutiny than they did before,” said Paul Clarke, a Northridge political consultant. “One of the things that the voters have learned is that eventually somebody pays for these things.

“There is perhaps a feeling that it’s more of a luxury than a necessity,” he said of higher-education bond proposals. “It’s starting to be perceived by voters as falling in the same category of other school bonds that don’t pass. And I think the voters were in an anti-spending mood all the way around.”

But Barry Munitz, chancellor of the Cal State University system, warned that the unwillingness of the public to finance higher-education projects would have dire consequences for campuses that have become increasingly crowded and strapped for cash.

“Five years from now and 10 years from now, hundreds of thousands of students and their families will ask, ‘Why is there no place to go?’ And then they will be mystified,” he said.

Times staff writer Virginia Ellis contributed to this story.