School Funding Battle in Irvine Leaves Out Role of Legislature

Irvine schools are the tiara among the crown jewels of that community’s many positive attributes. The Irvine school system has a well-established reputation for providing children with a quality education. It is little wonder, then, that those advocates for the school parcel tax in Irvine waged such a tenacious, but unsuccessful, campaign in favor of the levy.

Opponents were equally determined, as witnessed by their ability to turn back the tax on more than one occasion. They made a compelling argument that local property taxes already were too high, and also questioned the efficiency of the school district.

Both sides were right. Keeping the rich mix of art, music, and science programs offered by the Irvine schools is a justified priority. Keeping property taxes in line is also a worthy goal. Both sides were hostile to each other, but perhaps their hostility was misdirected.

Irvine is an affluent area, with high property values for both business and residential land. This valuable land produces a gusher of property tax revenue, but not very much of it goes to supporting the local schools. Most of the property tax largess in Irvine goes to other local agencies. The city, which in 1996-97 received over $32 million in sales tax, also got some $9 million in property tax revenue that same year.

City-operated “dependent” special districts are a factor as well. The Orange County Fire Authority took a healthy cut of property tax, more than $4 million.

The city is, to put it mildly, handsomely financed. That’s a fact that Irvine school parcel tax advocates might want to contemplate next time they attend a hearing in the palatial Irvine City Hall. Irvine property taxpayers’ disproportionate contribution to the fire authority made headlines a while back.

Of course, the city and the fire authority are not the only local governments that manage to garner property tax revenue. The Irvine Ranch Water District is an important factor in the property tax arena.

An interested citizen who visits the very nicely appointed IRWD headquarters on Sand Canyon Avenue and asks for a budget probably will be handed a thin document titled Irvine Ranch Water District Operating Budget. Way too modest a document to give full credit to the complexity of district finances, the operating budget doesn’t hint at the magnitude of the district’s assets.

The persistent citizen can get some idea of the size of the IRWD money pool by looking at the most recently available state controller reports (a daunting task, to be sure). In 1995-96, interest revenue for district water and sewer functions was upward of $22 million. This amount of interest revenue suggests a cash pool in the $400-million range.

No doubt the district can go into great detail about why keeping such cash around is both necessary and prudent, and much of the explanation would probably involve somber intonations about capital plant replacement, depreciation and other fascinating financial concepts. But no matter how you cut it, IRWD has lots of the taxpayers’ money.

Given these factors, what can Irvine school parcel tax advocates, and their opponents, advocate in common? Holding art classes in the City Council chambers? Enlisting firefighters to teach calculus between emergency calls? Scheduling band practice in the IRWD lobby? All unlikely.

Last week’s pledges by the Irvine Co., Donald Bren Foundation and Irvine Public Schools Foundation to make up the funding gap will work for one year, but the fundamental problems remain.

At best, perhaps the city might enter into an agreement with the school district to undertake certain school site maintenance functions, thereby freeing up some of the school district funds for direct education programs. It is unlikely that the IRWD board would, without direct legislative action, give up anything. It is too much fun to run a cash-rich special district that the general public largely ignores.

Changing the allocation of local tax revenues in such a manner as to provide more funding for schools, and less expense for property taxpayers, requires strong, effective legislative action in Sacramento.

Given past experience, it does not seem likely that any substantial change will be forthcoming from the Legislature. The long and complex legislative history that has led to the current allocation of local property tax resources has created many strongly entrenched interests that would vehemently oppose any change.

Developers like special districts that can put public infrastructure in place quickly without messy public votes. City councils like having money for municipal purposes. Powerful state education officials, and their allies in the Legislature, like dictating programs and policies to local school districts.

Lots of entrenched interests don’t particularly mind local skirmishes like the Irvine school parcel tax. It draws attention from the more fundamental legislative actions that would be required to satisfy both the pro- and anti-parcel tax citizens.