MISSION VIEJO : Prop. 174 Debate Almost Gets Personal

Using sarcasm and humor, three Saddleback Valley Unified School District trustees rebuffed an effort this week to hold them personally responsible for legal fees that could arise over a resolution they passed recently involving Proposition 174.

Board member Frank Ury, a proponent of the voucher initiative, had proposed that Board President Bobbee Cline, Marcia Birch and Dore Gilbert waive usual protections from the district and pay from their own pockets any legal expenses that might arise should someone sue over the resolution.

He was joined in support by board member Debbie Hughes, also a proponent of the measure, which would provide taxpayer-funded vouchers worth about $2,600 to be used by children for tuition at private or parochial schools.

But before Ury and Hughes could argue their point, Gilbert introduced an amendment to the proposal that would instead hold the two voucher supporters financially responsible for any losses the district might suffer should Prop. 174 pass on the November ballot.

The proposal ended up going down to unanimous defeat, but as Gilbert quipped: “The point passes.”

Gilbert said: “The point is that school board members should not have to worry about being sued every time they make a vote on a controversial issue. This was just another technicality used to try and intimidate those of us who are strongly opposed to initiatives that will destroy public education.”

The board majority approved a resolution two weeks ago that says the district could lose between $5 million and $12 million if the initiative should pass. That was based on certain assumptions and analysis by independent agencies.

The loss of funding, if not reimbursed by the state, could cause major cutbacks in programs and services available to children, according to the resolution.

The resolution, however, does not take a position one way or the other on the initiative. But Ury and Hughes said they believe the resolution violates a court settlement reached last year barring the district from taking a “partisan” position on the initiative.

Sponsors of the ballot initiative sued the Saddleback Valley Unified School District and one other Orange County district in April, 1992, alleging that they illegally used public funds to oppose the measure.

In March, 1992, the Saddleback board had approved a resolution opposing the measure and urged people not to sign petitions that would qualify it for the ballot. The resolution was later reproduced in a newsletter sent to parents by the district’s principals.

As part of a court settlement, the district agreed to rescind the resolution, which it did in April, 1993.

District officials, however, said the latest resolution is legal and that school boards have the right to gather, analyze and make available factual information about issues that affect their schools.