Capistrano School Tax Ballot Measure Loses

A ballot measure to raise property taxes for new school construction in the fast-growing Capistrano Unified School District went down to defeat Tuesday when it failed to garner the two-thirds approval required for passage.

Measure A was approved by just over half of the more than 19,000 voters who cast ballots, according to unofficial final tallies by the Orange County registrar of voters.

The vote on Measure A was seen as an important test of who will bear the financial burden of paying for growth in booming southern Orange County: future residents or those who already live there. While the measure failed to win passage, its supporters said the majority of yes votes was a sign that more people are willing to pay a higher price for education.

The turnout of 20% was slightly higher than projected at 67 polling places throughout the sprawling district, which stretches from Laguna Niguel to the San Diego County line and includes the cities of San Clemente, Dana Point, Mission Viejo, San Juan Capistrano and the community of Rancho Santa Margarita.

At Crown Valley Elementary School in Laguna Niguel, about 20% of the precinct’s registered voters had voted as of 4 p.m., according to polling captains. “They’ve just trickled in all day,” precinct worker Helen Hastings said.

A disappointed Capistrano Unified Supt. Jerome Thornsley said of the defeat, “People who vote no because they think it will stop growth are kidding themselves. The people will still move in. The developers will still build.”

But Thornsley said the district will try again sometime after the required 12-month waiting period for such special elections. In the meantime, he said, his severely overcrowded school district will “do the best that we can with the resources that we have.”

Although he was optimistic that such a measure ultimately would win at the polls, he said, “Unfortunately, in the meantime, lots of young people have lost their best educational years. Those against it ought to look at the long range, or big picture over the long haul.”

But the results were hailed by opponents, who have argued that the measure would shift the burden of new growth to current residents and mean a 50% cut in fees that developers are required to pay for schools.

“The question for people became: Where do we slow development down and where is the responsible government agency when you have to make the decision of can you serve a growing population?” said Russell Burkett, a slow-growth advocate who helped launch a last-minute campaign against Measure A.

“The school district can’t educate everyone and they should tell the county and the cities, ‘If you keep cramming those developments down over here, we can’t serve them.’ ”

The measure would have created a special tax assessment district to raise $85 million over 25 years to build three elementary schools, a junior high school and part of a high school for the overcrowded school district. Creation of such a district--known as a Mello-Roos district--requires approval of two-thirds of the voters. Very few communities in the state have given a two-thirds vote to such proposals in recent years.

The measure would have raised property taxes $100 a year on existing single-family homes, and $60 a year on existing condominiums, apartments and mobile homes. Owners of single-family homes built after the election would have paid $200 more a year, and owners of new townhouses, mobile homes and apartments would have paid $120 a year. Senior citizens would have been exempt from the new taxes.

Existing commercial and industrial buildings would have been assessed 6 cents more per square foot in taxes, with new buildings being assessed 12 cents more.

Opponents focused on the element of the measure that would have meant a cut of 50% in developer construction fees to the school district.

“This is an attempt to shift the burden from the developers onto the property owner, who is the taxpayer,” said Tom Rogers, who with Burkett and a small group of slow-growth advocates launched a last-minute campaign against Measure A. “It seems to me that the sentiment of Orange County voters has been very decidedly that new development should pay its own way.”

Measure A, he said, “is an attempt to make an end run around that sentiment.”

Some casting ballots Tuesday said they already were paying too much in property taxes as new homeowners in southern Orange County.

Double Taxation

“To raise more money from all these people who pay high taxes already with their brand-new homes is wrong,” Sharon Kovac, 43, a computer worker, said after voting at her polling place at Marian Bergeson Elementary School in Laguna Niguel.

Kovac, who has three grown children, said she voted against Measure A because she believes it is a form of double taxation, explaining that homeowners in her area already have paid for school improvements in the form of higher prices for their homes.

Carol Lobo, 53, a bookkeeper from Laguna Niguel, said she voted for Measure A because rapidly growing southern Orange County needs more schools.

“Take a look at the area,” Lobo said. “There’s no other way, as I see it. I wish we could vote the county supervisors out of office. They’re responsible for this. There has been no planning down here.”

But Jim Thorpe, 53, a college math instructor and former San Juan Capistrano mayor, disagreed that building of more schools was the answer to south county’s growth problem.

“It’s like the building of freeways; you build new freeways, and you get more growth,” said Thorpe, who declined to state how he voted as he emerged from a polling booth.

School officials had hoped that traditionally low voter turnout in such single-issue elections would mean that people with children in the schools, who favored the new bonds, would turn out to vote yes, while others would not vote.

But Thornsley said the district could not count on that factor alone winning the election for them, because a high percentage of residents have no school-age children. Many of those are senior citizens, who tend to have a higher vote turnout.

Voters Locked Out

That is why the district decided not to tax homeowners aged 62 and older who have no children in the public school system.

At one polling place in Dana Point, some voters found themselves locked out.

“I had to sit outside this locked gate until a person who lives in the community pulled up to get in,” complained Kenny Ferguson, 18, whose voting booth was inside the Harbor Point Apartment Clubhouse, a gated community in the 32000 block of Pointe Sutton.

Once inside, Ferguson said he couldn’t find any parking. By the time he reached a polling booth, “I was just fuming,” he said. On his way out, he said he saw three cars lined up at the locked gate waiting to enter.

The county registrar’s office said that the malfunctioning gate, the lone reported instance of polling problems Tuesday, was repaired by 7:20 a.m.

Last week, as campaigning for the measure was shifted into high gear, a complaint was filed with the Orange County district attorney’s office that the school district has used taxpayer funds illegally to campaign for Measure A.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Connie Johnson said her office is looking into the charges, but she said the inquiry would take several weeks to complete.

Rogers said the school district had sent at least one letter home with students that, while not directly calling for a “yes” vote on Measure A, indirectly advocated its passage. He also said district officials have not allowed opponents of the measure the same access to parents and voters to give them opposing information.

Thornsley said the district had obtained a legal opinion from the Orange County Department of Education’s counsel stating that schools can legally send out information on such an election if the material does not directly urge voters to approve the measure.

“We did follow very carefully all of the guidelines,” he said. “I feel very comfortable that nothing will come of that.”

ELECTION RESULTS

Capistrano Unified School District

Measure A--Special Tax District

69 of 69 Precincts Reporting Votes % Yes 10,089 51.9 No 9,335 48.1

Note: 2/3 yes vote required for approval.