Voucher for Schools to Be on ’94 Ballot

An initiative that would enable parents to spend tax dollars on private school tuition qualified for the June, 1994, ballot Thursday, but supporters vowed to continue trying to get it onto this November’s ballot, even if it means going to court for a fourth time.

The San Diego County registrar of voters said Thursday that there was evidence of fraud on some ballot petitions, killing the measure’s chances to get on this fall’s ballot. The registrar found an unusually high number of duplicate signatures, with six or eight individuals signing 15 to 20 times.

Registrar Conny McCormack referred the matter to the San Diego County district attorney, who declined comment Thursday on a possible criminal investigation.

The initiative, which would guarantee schoolchildren state-funded vouchers to use toward $2,600 in tuition at public or private schools, failed to qualify for the November ballot last June because of a lower-than-expected validity rate of San Diego County petitions.

Members of the Choice-in-Education League (ExCEL), which lobbied aggressively to place the issue before voters, Thursday accused the “education establishment” of sabotage.

“We have known all along that we have enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot,” Kevin D. Teasley, a spokesman for ExCEL, said at a Los Angeles press conference. “The education establishment just did not want our initiative on the ballot this year.

“And so they did everything they could to stop us. We have suspected some foul play was involved in keeping our initiative from the ballot and (published reports) confirm our suspicions.”

Teasley said the organization would file suit “in the next day or two” in Sacramento Superior Court or the state Supreme Court seeking for a fourth time to get the measure onto this November’s ballot.

“Our chances are much better now,” he said, “because of this obvious sabotage. They’ll be forced to listen to our arguments.”

Teasley cited a Wall Street Journal story Aug. 11 in which a teacher said he and “his colleagues signed multiple copies of the petition to skew the samples.”

“The San Diego registrar confirms our suspicions that a sabotage effort took place,” Teasley said.

But McCormack reacted angrily Thursday to the insinuation that she was pointing fingers at any group for what she conceded appeared to be fraud in some of the more than 11,000 duplicate signatures.

“This is just a high number of duplicates,” McCormack said. “I’ve never said anything other than ‘this is a high number of duplicates.’ This attempt to extrapolate from this the guilt of one group or another is absurd. We never said anything about sabotage.”

Bill Crane, president of the San Diego Teachers Assn., called the accusations of ExCEL “an act of desperation.”

“I can understand the frustration of the ExCEL people in wanting to get their initiative on the ballot in November,” Crane said. “But we did not play any role in any kind of fraud. We requested--sternly--that our members not sign the petition.”

The secretary of state of California, which confirmed the measure’s June, 1994, ballot qualification on Thursday, forced it off the November ballot by taking away 21,554 signatures from San Diego County petitions after a random sampling last June.

The petition drive fell short by 21,242 signatures, and ExCEL was forced to start its statewide petition drive over again.

McCormack said an exhaustive inventory of every signature on every petition has since confirmed that some individuals signed petitions as many as 20 times. After the full count, 107,010 of the 157,296 signatures collected in San Diego County were deemed valid.

After the random sampling last June, the secretary of state ordered a full count of all petitions turned in statewide. By late Wednesday, the measure had received 91% of the 615,958 signatures needed to qualify for the June ’94 ballot.

At 9 a.m. Thursday, with two counties yet to be counted, the group had collected 639,398 signatures, putting it over the top.

Teasley said the measure is necessary because “people have waited too long for reforms in the public schools. For too long, public schools have ignored parents’ and children’s needs, choosing to represent only teachers or administrators.

“This puts kids’ needs first. It allows the kids and parents to choose the school that best meets their needs. No longer will schools be so focused on benefits, salaries and perks. This forces them to do something.”

Crane, of the San Diego teachers’ group, said the measure would “hurt public education by taking dollars away from public schools. Public schools are underfunded already and about to take another big hit in the state budget.

“It would also help to get rid of the common-school experience, which is so important in this state, especially with our tremendous amount of immigration. It could also lead to a two-tiered education system in that the private schools could exclude anyone they want.”

Crane said the people gathering signatures, who were paid 65 cents per name, probably were responsible for the duplicate signings.

“That is an extremely high price,” Crane said. “It seems to me you’re only opening yourself up to fraud by charging so much for signatures.”

“If the fee is more than it should have been,” McCormack said, “it creates an incentive to cheat. And that’s a concern I’ll pass along to the district attorney.”