Troubled Schools Ask Voters for Their Help

School districts faced with increased enrollment, higher costs and a tighter state budget are turning to the ballot box to raise revenue for classroom operations that used to come from the state.

They’re also turning to experts to help them win.

San Dieguito Union High School District last month became the latest in a wave of districts to seek voter help in getting more money, and, like many others, it is trying to develop more sophistication in its campaigning.

The catch is that schools trying to raise money through elections must win a two-thirds majority, a threshold that election experts say borders on the improbable.

“You can always get 50%, and you can even get 60%, but you can’t get 67%,” said Robert Meadow, president of Decision Research, a San Diego-based public opinion firm.

San Diego County school districts have repeatedly tried to pass general obligation bonds--which can be used only for capital improvements--to accommodate the influx of students in the past decade.

But, in the 13 years since the passage of property-tax-cutting Proposition 13 in 1978, the districts have had a miserable record of winning the two-thirds majority needed for such bond issues. Out of seven attempts among the county’s districts, only Escondido Union Elementary was successful.

If general obligation bonds required a simple majority to win, all seven attempts would have succeeded, as would 94% of the general bond elections conducted statewide, according to the county education office.

Now that districts are finding their operating budgets threatened, they are turning to parcel-tax elections to address the situation. A parcel tax levies a set tax on a piece of land, regardless of its size or value.

“We’ve already trimmed our budget around the edges over the last three years,” said San Dieguito district Supt. William Berrier. “We don’t have anything left to cut except the instructional programs.”

This year, the district eliminated bus service for high school students. The year before, it cut back on campus security. Next year, faced with a $2-million shortfall, Berrier said, the district may cut as many as 50 positions, including some teaching posts.

On Jan. 30, the district Board of Trustees opted to ask for a $50-per-parcel tax on a special June 4 ballot in an effort to raise about $2.5 million a year for the next five years.

It will be only the third such parcel-tax election held in the county in the past eight years, but school officials and election experts say it won’t be long before more districts try the same thing.

Yet the difficulties are considerable.

“One difficulty that all areas face is that about 25% of the voters under no circumstances will vote to tax themselves,” Meadow said. “And that means you have to get 89% of the people who will consider raising taxes” to vote for one.

Meadow said there is also a gap between those who are being asked to pay the tax and those who will benefit. Typically, “you have old white people being asked to send young brown people to school,” Meadow said.

Meadow said a racist backlash against immigrants, both legal and illegal, sometimes works against schools in areas where migrants have been an issue.

And the hurdles don’t end there.

A parcel tax is often considered unfair since it levies the same amount of tax on every piece of land in a district, regardless of its size or value.

“There is some real anger on the part of voters, when they see that, particularly among fixed- or low-income voters,” said Kent Price, president of Price Research Consultants, the only consulting firm in the country to specialize in school funding elections.

Also, a campaign for a parcel-tax election or general obligation bond, including a voter survey and campaign services, can run as high as $65,000. And the cost of the election itself varies depending on how many other issues are on the ballot. San Dieguito’s special election is particularly expensive--an estimated $15,000.

The district can pick up the tab only for the election and the voter survey, while the campaign must be paid for through voluntary donations solicited by an independent campaign committee.

“It’s kind of risky,” Meadow said. “It’s cheap if you win and expensive if you lose.”

“The first thing voters say when they read something that says a district is spending money on an outside consultant is, ‘See, if they’ve got the money for this, they’ve got money for other things,’ ” Meadow said.

Despite the costs, said Tom Robinson, director of facilities planning at the county education office, districts are increasingly turning to consulting firms for campaign technology and strategy.

“There’s an increase in the hiring of consultants to do feasibility studies--which isn’t the campaign, but rather what amount of tax it takes to meet my capital needs and what is the feasibility of a bond measure that would allow us to do so,” Robinson said.

Price said that, in the past two years, districts have gone beyond the days of finding out how much money they need and then placing the request on a ballot.

“Now we’re doing systematic polling beforehand, voter surveys, and those districts that have been most successful have geared their parcel tax back to what the people are willing to support,” said Price, whose firm boasts an 87% success rate in school-bond and tax elections--contrasted with a 44% success rate statewide since Proposition 13 passed.

“The biggest innovations have been the use of the voter survey and scientific polling,” he said.

The nature of the school’s mission has always been diametrically opposed to that of campaigns, according to Price.

“School districts are in the business by nature to explore everything and educate the world about everything,” he said. “You can’t do that necessarily in a competitive election environment. That is not the way, necessarily, to win elections.”

“Elections are by nature competitive. You win elections the same way you sell cars. You sell cars by promoting the positive aspects of the car,” Price said. “I’m not saying school districts are now in the business of hoodwinking, but they’ve gotten better at presenting the positive side.”

Schools used to try to present all the pertinent points of complicated tax issues, resulting in confused voters, he said--and confused voters vote against taxes.

“School districts have gotten better at articulating their message and identifying what the message should be. Before, instead of focusing on three issues, they would focus on 300,” Price said.

Ellen Gifford, president of the San Diego County League of Women Voters, said she has not seen any backlash against schools that advocate ballot measures.

“If you were selling a product, you would want to put your best foot forward. In the case of schools, they are trying to sell education. I see no problem with this at all,” Gifford said.

Meadow said schools in the past focused their campaigns on the parents and neglected other parts of the electorate.

“Parents only represent a small portion of the voters. Typically, in San Diego County, about 30% to 35% of the households have children, and that means two-thirds don’t have kids in schools,” he said.

Furthermore, people in the age bracket most likely to have children in school do not have a high voting rate.

“It’s quite clear that voting peaks at people who are 65 years old, and, as you go down the age scale, the voting rate is less,” Meadow said. “And we always find that the people who are most willing to vote for the taxes are also the most likely to not even register to vote.”

One of the most pressing constraints on the San Dieguito district in its special election is time, said Tom Shepard, a partner in the Primacy Group, a San Diego-based political consulting firm.

“This kind of election, if you have a chance to win it at all, requires the development of a very extensive voluntary support base, and it’s not the sort of thing that can be done overnight,” he said.

Fortunately for San Dieguito, a coalition of parents, teachers, administrators, board members and classified employees was formed last year to act as a legislative advocate for the district and can take an active role in the passage of the parcel tax, said Supt. Berrier.

Although the group, the Legislative Action Network, has yet to take an official stand on the issue of a parcel tax, a majority of its members support it, said co-chair Jeanne Orphan.

“We have to try. What other options do we have?” Orphan said. “This is desperation time, as far as I see it.”

Gene Hartline, assistant superintendent of the Escondido Union Elementary School District, which won its general bond election in 1989, said there were two main reasons for that success.

“One of the tactics that was involved was determining the best time to have an election,” Hartline said. The vote was taken in a special election in which the bond was the only issue on the ballot (the same situation with San Dieguito).

“In a special election, you only bring the people who are interested in the issue to the polls that day, and that limits a general vote that can be negative,” Hartline said.

Historically, however, school bond and tax elections not held on state or federal election dates have fared about the same as those that coincided with general elections, except in the case of large school districts, which did worse on non-general election days.

“The other part is that we had very aggressive campaigning among our parents,” Hartline said.

Hartline said there was no organized opposition to the election, which won 73.5% of the vote. The district hired Price Research to conduct opinion surveys and assist in managing the campaign.

Such elections would become much easier under an Assembly bill carried by Jack O’Connell (D-Carpinteria). The bill would replace the two-thirds majority requirement for school general bonds with a 50% threshold.

The bill, which was opposed by former Gov. George Deukmejian but is receiving support from Gov. Pete Wilson, will not be able to offer help to districts until at least June, 1992, since it would be a constitutional amendment and must receive voter approval.