Family Taxpayers Foundation

Public awareness is growing that the thirty-year attempt to get better schools by spending more money isn’t working. In recent years pro-referendum supporters make little attempt to argue that increasing spending improves education. Instead, their more truthful message is, “give us more money or we’ll make things worse.”

School boards and administrators threatening the people they’re supposed to serve is now common practice. If voters don’t give them what they want, the government-run school districts warn that they will do things like change bell times, alter bus routes and pickup times, and cut extracurricular activities and other popular programs.

And the threats are working because people understand that a public school system capable of decades of mediocrity is certainlycapable of shortchanging their kids even further. Since most busy people don’t have the time or energy to demand change, they instead give in to these tactics.

Contrary to the prohibition in the state's Election Interference Act, districts engage in activities with the clear purpose of urging a yes vote.

The integrity of the election process is at stake and the media should share in the effort to guard it. Unfortunately, thus far theprint and electronic media have chosen toignorewhat takes place in communities during the months leading up to a vote.

In many districts, newspaper pages in the weeks and months leading up to a referendum vote are filled withstories ofteachers crying to studentsabout what a “no” vote would cause.Grade school children are warned in class about what would happen if a tax increase isn’t approved.The articles don’t point out the obvious – that this iselectioneering and it is against the law.

It’s doubtful that any newspaper wouldapprove of administrators sending letters home or announcing over the school PA system the dire consequences of a John Kerry presidency during the months leading up to the November 2004 election.

Yet that is exactly the kind of thing that happens when tax dollars fund such pro-referendum activities.

The first part of the state statute says: “No public funds shall be used to urge any elector to vote for or against any candidate or proposition…” The second part does allow public funds to be used for the “dissemination of factual information…”

Telling the public the amount of money asked for and why they’re asking for it would constitute factual information. Threatening retaliation if the voters say “no” does not.

The political decisions following a failed referendum would be subject to community input and a vote of the board. Any threat of future action based on worst-case scenario projections is obviouslyan attempt to “urge” a yes vote.

School districts continue to engage in inappropriate behavior during referendum campaigns. Our view is simple: it is unethical for tax dollars to be used to fund public information campaigns to support tax increases.

How schools pass referenda

Citizens for Reasonable and Fair Taxes’ (CRAFT) co-founder Cathy Peschke kept track of newspaper headlines of stories leading up to referendum votes.

Here’s the list of actual headlines:

“Schools face cuts if tax vote fails” - Rockford Register Star

“Missing school hour equals tough times for the college-bound” - Sun Publications

“Dist. 96 warns of possible staff cuts” - Daily Herald

“Eliminating the extras – District 15” - Daily Herald

“PTA parents not happy about shift District 25” - Daily Herald

“District 57 schools chief proposes more staff cuts” - Daily Herald

“Farmington school officials eye cuts, changes” - Peoria Journal Star

“District 103 lists possible budget cuts” - Daily Herald

“Dist. 34 announces fee hikes, staff cuts” - Daily Herald

“Macomb schools may see staff cuts” - Peoria Journal Star

“$77 million in school cuts” - Chicago Tribune

“Staff, programs cut at high school to lower deficit” - Bloomington Pantagraph

“Principals to view teacher, program cuts” - Chicago Sun-Times

“Glenbard schools prepare for cuts in wake of tax hike failure” - Daily Herald

“Music, band students react to Dist. 135 program cuts” - The Star

“Geneva schools debate budget cuts or tax hike” - Kane County Chronicle

“District 70 may increase class sizes” - Peoria Journal Star

“Cuts in future if tax hike does not pass” - Daily Southtown

“Schools to cut all student activities” - Chicago Tribune

“Cuts approved for Monroe district” - Peoria Journal Star

“Committee searches for least painful cuts” - Daily Herald

“Public can make last pitch to stop cuts” - Daily Herald

“School fees rise as taxpayer support dwindles” - Daily Herald

“High school fees take toll on parents” - Daily Herald

This list is not an exhaustive list. School districts and their employees across the state are using our childrenand their education as pawns to pass referenda. Schools exist to educate our children. They do not exist for the sake of teachers’ and administrators’ wallets. Despite increased funding every year it is never enough. Schools have a spending problem not a funding problem.

I challenge anyone to find three districts in Illinois that have frozen salaries. I mean really frozen salaries, no step increases, no cost of living increases, no increased sick days in place of “frozen salaries” and no increases for “advanced degrees or further education.”

It is not about need, it is about greed. Demand true education reform, demand school choice now.

Examples of Interference

Sending home "vote yes" materials with your children.
Presenting "vote yes" information to the children at the schools.
Using school funds to encourage a yes vote.
Putting on a presentation at the school and asking for a yes vote.
Providing false information in referendum material.
Calling members of the community who oppose the referendum into your office on school time and trying to persuade them to vote yes for the referendum.
Posting "yes" materials in the school.

To learn more about CRAFT, click here.

Election Interference Act

(10 ILCS 5/9-25.1) Sec. 9-25.1. Election interference. (a) As used in this Section, "public funds" means any funds appropriated by the Illinois General Assembly or by any political subdivision of the State of Illinois. (b) No public funds shall be used to urge any elector to vote for or against any candidate or proposition, or be appropriated for political or campaign purposes to any candidate or political organization. This Section shall not prohibit the use of public funds for dissemination of factual information relative to any proposition appearing on an election ballot, or for dissemination of information and arguments published and distributed under law in connection with a proposition to amend the Constitution of the State of Illinois. (c) The first time any person violates any provision of this Section, that person shall be guilty of a Class B misdemeanor. Upon the second or any subsequent violation of any provision of this Section, the person violating any provision of this Section shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

Posted February 21, 2007.