ELECTIONS / PROPOSITION 170 : Should School Bond Issues Be a Matter of Majority Rule? : Education: Backers say measure would ease overcrowding, but opponents fear a financing scheme that targets property owners for higher taxes.

When a bond measure to build several new schools failed in 1991--despite the support of 64% of the voters--Camarillo school officials borrowed against future developers’ fees to finance an elementary school needed right away.

But the growing district still must purchase land for several schools that will be needed in the next dozen or so years, an impossible task without bond money, said Associate Supt. Howard Hamilton.

“Quite frankly, if we delay too long, there won’t be any property left for schools,” Hamilton said.

To ease overcrowding, officials in the Pleasant Valley Elementary School District and across Ventura County support Proposition 170, a November state ballot measure that would allow school bonds to pass with a simple majority.

“The majority of voters should be able to determine what will happen with their community,” Hamilton said.

However, opponents of the state constitutional amendment say Proposition 170 would unfairly put the desires of renters above property owners, who would pay the higher property taxes.

“Majority rules sounds good on the surface, but it’s not fair in this case, because the majority of people voting are not the ones paying,” said Mike Saliba, executive director of the Ventura County Taxpayer’s Assn.

Without the two-thirds threshold, nine out of 10 local bond measures proposed statewide since 1986 would have passed, opponents say. Even with that requirement, nearly half of those measures were successful, they say.

“The two-thirds requirement is the best control we have over runaway spending,” said Jere Robings, president of the Ventura County Alliance of Taxpayers.

Without local bonds, districts compete for an inadequate pool of state construction money or sap developers’ fees, which raises home prices in the process, supporters argue.

In the Oxnard Union High School District--already 1,500 students over capacity--officials have used their share of state construction bonds to buy land for a new building, and developers’ fees have been temporarily tapped out.

A bond measure that would have raised $45 million to build a new high school failed last year, although nearly 60% of the voters backed it, Assistant Supt. Robert Brown said. Meanwhile, the district expects an additional 1,000 students within the next four years, he said.

Having to get two-thirds approval for raising taxes is a burdensome hurdle for local districts to overcome, Brown said, pointing out that the state needs only a simple majority to pass construction bonds.

Every election year since 1982, state voters have filled some of the gaps by passing statewide school construction bonds which then are doled out according to need. However, there is not enough state money to go around, officials said.

“This (proposition) would give local voters an opportunity to decide if they want to provide facilities for schoolchildren,” Brown said.

Besides using state bond money to build schools, school districts assess fees against new home construction. Those costs, up to $4,000 for a 1,500-square-foot home, are typically absorbed by the home buyer, industry experts say.

Because home prices and school construction are linked, the building industry is pushing the initiative, said Dee Zinke, executive officer of the Building Industry Assn. of Ventura and Los Angeles counties.

“If no development occurs, they have no funding mechanism locally. They have to continue splitting at the seams,” Zinke said.

Opponents of Proposition 170 say they fear the measure would be the first step toward trampling Proposition 13, the sweeping tax-reform measure approved by voters in 1978 that limited taxes on property in California taxes to 1% of 1975 assessed value.

Voters in 1986 approved Proposition 46 to allow the cap to be exceeded for the purchase of buildings or property. That measure required a two-thirds vote for approval.

“We’re just trying to hold the line and keep from recurring what happened in the ‘70s, when people were being taxed out of their homes,” said Robings.

Not all Ventura County school districts backing Proposition 170 are behind it because they plan to pitch bond issues in the foreseeable future.

In Simi Valley, a $35-million bond measure approved by voters in 1989 has funded major renovations at every school site in the district. One year earlier, the same issue was rejected, even though fewer than 35% of voters opposed it, Supt. Mary Beth Wolford said.

“It just breaks your heart,” Wolford said. “It’s very costly and time-consuming to run a campaign twice.”

Thousand Oaks officials say they expect to have enough money from developers’ fees to cover school construction needs at least through 2015.

School board member Dolores Didio said the issue is not whether Thousand Oaks schools would benefit from the initiative’s passage. The issue is whether bonds should become a more viable funding option for school officials to choose, Didio said.

“It gives local control to districts.”

Some school leaders worry that 170 has been overshadowed in the election debates by the controversial school voucher initiative, which would grant a tax subsidy to parents who choose to send their children to a private school.

“This one has gotten really buried,” said Simi Valley schools chief Wolford. “That’s a shame, because it took six years of hard work to get it on the ballot.”

Assemblyman Jack O’Connell (D-Carpinteria), whose efforts put the proposal before voters, agreed that the voucher initiative has been talked about more. But that could work in favor of 170, he said.

“Hopefully, a disproportionate number of pro-education people will show,” O’Connell said. “People who support education will vote no on 174 and yes on 170.”

That’s what worries Robings of the Ventura County Alliance of Taxpayers.

“Educators are going to marshal their forces against vouchers, so this has an excellent opportunity to pass,” Robings said.