Conejo Ballot Item to Test Trend Against Tax Hikes for Schools

At a time when tax increases to aid schools are meeting resistance throughout the state, Thousand Oaks voters will be asked June 4 to approve a measure that would boost property taxes to improve education.

The Conejo Valley Unified School District board is urging voters in the affluent Ventura County community to impose an annual $77-per-parcel property tax to finance a reduction in the size of classes.

The estimated $2.77 million a year raised by the tax surcharge would go toward hiring 82 more teachers for the district’s 17,800 students.

Trustees Split on Issue

The goal would be to lower the district’s teacher-pupil ratio from 32-to-1 to 28-to-1.

Unless again placed on the ballot and approved by voters, the tax would be discontinued after four years.

In addition to bucking a trend against such tax increases, the proposal has embroiled trustees--who are split 3-to-2 on the issue--in controversy.

Key issues in the debate over Measure K are whether reducing class size actually improves student performance and whether a flat tax is equitable.

The debate also has been marked by repeated charges that the tax proposal is a political payoff to the local teachers’ association.

William Honig, state superintendent of public instruction, has entered the fray on the side of the tax increase, saying that reduction in class size is “one of the key reforms needed” in California schools.

Opponents, while questioning whether a small reduction in class size will improve education, also contend that the district is likely to receive increased funding from the Legislature and from state lottery funds earmarked for education.

Before passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, California school boards were permitted to raise their property-tax rates without voter approval.

Only 5 Increases Approved

However, Prop. 13 imposed a requirement on government agencies that all tax increases be approved by two-thirds of voters.

As of last November, 17 school districts had submitted tax increases for voter approval, according to the California Taxpayers Assn. Only five were approved.

In addition, voters in the La Canada Unified School District in March turned down a $150-per-parcel tax that trustees said would forestall cutbacks in services.

As with all but a handful of proposed school tax increases in California, the La Canada plan failed to get two-thirds of the vote, winning only a 56.8% majority.

State education officials said the trend away from voter support for tax increases became obvious last November, when six tax surcharges failed and only one passed.

“For reasons I can’t pin down,” said a state Department of Education analyst, “voters appear to have lost what little taste they had for these isolated and generally small tax increases.”

‘Campaign Technique’ Cited

Leonard Kreidt, a former official with the California Teachers Assn., wrote recently that an analysis of 13 such tax votes suggested the wealth of a district had little bearing on the outcome.

The most important factor determining the success or failure of a particular proposal was “campaign technique,” Freidt wrote in a California Journal article.

Proposals generally won where voters were “adequately informed and propagandized,” he said.

In Thousand Oaks, Measure K backers have relied largely on a series of more than 20 public meetings to get their position across.

Proponents trace the origin of the tax election to what they view as the district’s long-standing problem with large classes.

Large Class Size Conceded

Both sides concede classes in the Thousand Oaks district are among the largest in the state among districts of similar size.

But opponents argue that the tax election’s origin was the last election, when Dolores Didio and Ellyn Wilkins, two of the three trustees supporting the tax increase, were first elected with support from the Unified Assn. of Conejo Teachers.

The association, which represents teachers in collective bargaining, supports the tax increase.

But association leaders have denied that the tax election was promised in return for their support.

Along with board member Priscilla Schroeder, Wilkins and Didio have forged a majority coalition on the board, clashing frequently with trustees Lori Kissinger and Gary Pederson.

The terms of Kissinger, Pederson and Schroeder expire in November.

Wilkins recently dismissed Measure K opponents as “the losers in the last campaign.”

In addition to Kissinger and Pederson, opponents include the Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce, the Ventura County Taxpayers’ Assn. and former school trustees Carolyn Kopp, Martha Argue and Henry Abbink.

Virtually all opponents have criticized the board majority for calling the election in June at a cost to the district of $40,000, when it could have been held along with the November general election for about $1,000.

Proponents say that delaying the vote until November would delay the hiring of new teachers until the 1986-87 school year.

If the measure passes, the district plans to hire half the alloted new teachers this summer, with all 82 new positions filled by September, 1986.

Flat Tax Criticized

Gene Daffern, executive director of the county taxpayers’ group, criticized the flat tax as “falling more heavily on seniors and others on fixed incomes.”

He also said private and parochial schools with class sizes of 40 or more frequently out-perform public schools with far smaller classes.

Chamber of Commerce officials said the proposal was “ill-timed” because of the probability of increased state aid, money from the upcoming lottery and because “reducing class sizes won’t guarantee that education would be improved.”

Kissinger said that because of a shortage of classrooms in some schools, courses such as metal shop and government might have to be closed down to make room for other classes.

Honig, in a letter to board President Didio, advocated reduction in class size throughout California.

Reduced class size, he said, “complements the changes we are making in graduation requirements, better student discipline, higher standards for teachers and students and improved textbooks and instructional materials.”

‘$11-Million Boondoggle’

Nathaniel Glickman, a local businessman and chairman of the No on K Committee, has called the measure an “$11-million boondoggle” and questioned how the district could find enough good teachers to reduce class sizes.

“It took considerable time to get the excellent teachers we have and you would have this community believe you can get 41 more of comparable talent in two months?” he asked.

Didio said the tax increase would have its primary effect on grades four through 12, where teachers frequently “struggle with up to 38 students in a class.”

State law restricts class size in kindergarten to an average of 32 and in grades one, two and three to an average of 31, she said.

Didio said the “real issue here is whether people are willing to pay $6.42 a month to improve education in our community.”