With almost half the precincts counted, it appeared Tuesday night that voters had soundly rejected a proposed $720 million bond to expand Mt. San Jacinto College's two campuses and build two others, based on partial unofficial election results.

But Mark Zacovic, the college's new president remained hopeful, cautioning that the early results didn't mean that the bond had failed, noting that absentee ballots generally are counted first, and absentee votes traditionally lean against bond measures.

"I'm very confident," Zacovic said of the bond's chances.

With ballots from 48 percent of the precincts counted, about 55.1 percent of the electorate had rejected the measure. The bond needs 55 percent approval of the electorate to pass. So, the college needed about two-thirds of the uncounted ballots to secure passage of the bond, known as Measure G.

College officials anticipated that the bond would pass, largely because a January poll conducted by the Santa Monica research firm Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Associates seemed to indicate that district residents favored expanded and new campuses. According to the survey, about 60 percent of 500 likely June voters indicated they would support the bond.

The college also raised almost $205,000 to publicly champion the measure's merits. Officials said the measure was necessary to meet the exploding growth in the southwest corridor of the county. Without its passage, Zacovic has said, the college will never catch up to the burgeoning population.

But a late campaign against the bond may have helped doom its chances of passage.

Temecula Councilman Mike Naggar publicly stated that he didn't understand why the college sought $720 million, noting that the college never issued a statement outlining specifically what the money would go for or even anticipated costs.

Naggar couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday night.

If the bond does fail, Zacovic said the college would "retrench and regroup and figure out how to communicate with the public. We have to get them to understand the need we have."

Zacovic, who didn't rule out a second attempt at a bond on the November ballot, noted that the college's bond campaign for Tuesday's ballot encompassed just 10 weeks -- "it was an abbreviated campaign," he said. The college board of trustees approved the bond March 9.

Naggar wasn't the only public official who criticized the bond, which was the largest ever proposed in Riverside County. Perris resident Ann Motte was the lone college trustee to vote against putting the bond on Tuesday's ballot. She said she would have preferred a bond in the $100 million range -- most of which would be to enhance the two campuses' athletic fields.

Motte has said that before the college considers building new campuses, it should first maximize space on its existing ones. She contends that the buildings are not used on Friday afternoons.

College officials, including Zacovic and former President Richard Giese, have disputed that contention, arguing that the campuses are maxed out during the times students want to take classes.

"I would challenge you to find unused capacity," Zacovic recently said.

If the bond ultimately passes, however, homeowners would pay for it over 25 years. College officials have estimated that the highest rate property owners would have pay to finance the debt would be $19.49 a year per $100,000 of assessed valuation.

Contact staff writer Brian Eckhouse at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2626, or beckhouse@californian.com.