School bond to be postponed

Clark County School Board members unanimously voted to postpone a $7 billion bond issue until 2010, but not before they were accused of being politically expedient in an election year.

Kevinn Donovan, a resident who spoke at a public hearing Friday, said the delay was not for the sake of being "fiscally responsible. It's the fact that it wasn't going to pass (in November) and you know it. That's why you want to remove it."

Ron Taylor, who is running for the School Board District B, wondered what caused the school board to do an about-face on a bond issue that would have raised money for 73 new schools over the next 10 years.

"The only thing I can figure out that has changed is the political climate," he said. "There are three board members up for re-election. They're finding it difficult to defend themselves with their constituents about passing this $9.5 billion bond."

The $9.5 billion figure also includes money from hotel room and real estate transfer taxes. Martin Dean Dupalo, a resident who spoke outside the meeting, questioned why the trustees couldn't have offered the public the choice of supporting a smaller bond issue. "It's like it's all or nothing," he said.

Trustees Mary Beth Scow, Terri Janison and Ruth Johnson, who are up for re-election, denied that they were motivated by politics.

"This is not a political move in a campaign season," Janison said. Instead, she said trustees were prudently responding to new data on school enrollment and the sluggish economic conditions.

School officials noted that enrollment declined by 4,000 during the last school year, indicating that families are leaving the area. Growth is expected to be flat or minimal for the coming school year. Normally, the nation's fifth largest school district is used to accommodating growth of 10,000 to 12,000 additional students a year.

Given the economic uncertainty, school officials thought it was wise to hold off on a new bond issue and extend the current construction program for two years.

Still, trustees said the decision was not easy one. Janison said some of her constituents were disappointed by the delay.

Scow also had some regrets. "I still wish we could have gone after the bond," she said. "I still firmly believe it would have passed. It would have given us a chance to get ahead of the growth, which we've never been able to do."

Paul Gerner, the associate superintendent responsible for school construction, said the next few years won't be easy since the school system will have to get along without the infusion of new revenue from 2008 bonds.

"I do think we'll find ourselves in some painful situations, looking at three or four things we would like to do but only have (the money) to do one," Gerner said. "That's the reality of it."

Jeff Weiler, the chief financial officer, said the school system has about $1.5 billion available for new construction and renovation for the next two years.

The money is from the 1998 bond campaign and the taxes on hotel rooms and real estate transfers. It's expected to fund 23 new schools and renovations.

Taxpayers should not expect a tax break because debt service on the 1998 bonds is expected to last another three to four years. The school property tax is about 55 cents per $100 of assessed value. The 2008 bond issue would have locked in the tax rate for at least another 10 years.

Joyce Haldeman, the associate superintendent for community relations, denied that school officials were worried that the November ballot would have been too crowded with school issues since there will likely be another ballot question about increasing the hotel room tax to raise more money for education.

Martin and Eleanor Koppel, two residents who spoke at Friday's hearing, urged the school board to campaign for impact fees on new home construction to make growth pay for its infrastructure costs like new schools. They said it was unfair to pass along the cost of growth to older residents.

"Otherwise, you're going to be hurting the taxpayer who has already raised his school children," Martin Koppel said.

Trustees said they support impact fees, but state lawmakers have not shown any enthusiasm for the concept.

The Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce, which had donated $10,000 for a public relations campaign for the $7 billion bond, will ask for its money back, a spokeswoman said Friday.

Contact reporter James Haug at jhaug@reviewjournal.com or 702-799-2922.