SFPS plans challenge to Local Election Act
District says new law will create financial burdens
The realities of the new Local Election Act are hitting home for the state’s 89 school districts.
Some public school leaders are arguing that provisions of the law, passed earlier this year, will place burdensome costs on districts across New Mexico and dilute voter support of school bond issues.
To that end, the five-member Santa Fe school board decided in a unanimous vote last week to ask the New Mexico School Boards Association and the other 88 districts to jointly request that lawmakers amend the law, effectively exempting districts from the measure.
The Local Election Act combines most nonpartisan local elections, held at different times throughout the year, into one larger election in the November of odd-numbered years. The school board, in last week’s resolution, says it will ask the Legislature to repeal sections of the law that pertain to school districts and restore the School Election Law, therefore authorizing districts to hold regular elections in February, when they previously have been held, or special mailballot elections at other times.
The resolution also asks the Legislature to eliminate contribution requirements for a Local Election Fund.
At Tuesday’s meeting, board President Steven Carrillo said that under the law, voters who oppose paying any property taxes to cover local government bonds or tax levies will “vote no, no, no, no, no all the way down the line. They can just vote no without understanding the issue.”
He and Superintendent Veronica García said the law also would require the district to spend at least $167,000 to hold a special mail-inballot election in February if it decided not to wait until November 2019 for its next election to ask for bond money or fill three school board seats.
State Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto, D-Albuquerque, one of two sponsors of the election bill, said he understands the district’s financial concerns. But what the school board is requesting, he said, is to “tax everybody but not have anybody vote in their elections.” Asked if he thought the board’s opposition to the new law amounts to an effort to restrict voter turnout, IveySoto said it does.
Carrillo disputed that characterization. His concern, he said in an interview Wednesday, is that the new law “could draw voters who are less informed about single candidates and issues.”
Ivey-Soto and state Rep. Paul Bandy, R-Aztec, cosponsored the election-consolidation bill this year to make voting easier for New Mexico residents and help increase turnout at the polls by cutting down on the number of small elections held throughout the year.
School boards, soil and water conservation districts, community colleges and towns across New Mexico hold their own elections on different dates, often with low voter turnout. In the past decade, Santa Fe school board and school bond elections have never drawn more than 10 percent of those eligible to vote.
During that period, eligible voters who cast ballots consistently supported bond requests and property tax levies — often by a wide margin.
In February, 5,042 of the 6,925 voters who cast ballots favored the school district’s request to renew a six-year, 2-mill property tax levy to pay for campus improvements. The measure raises about $11.5 million per year for the district and another $1.5 million for Santa Febased charter schools.
The board was planning to ask voters in February 2019 to approve renewal of another tax, one that raises $11 million a year for student computers and technology infrastructure upgrades. If the district waits until November 2019 to put the question on the general election ballot, it will have to get by without the tech funds for a year.
If the board opts to hold a special election in February in an
We realize we have low voter turnout, but those people who care — parents, educators and others who support public education — have always come out for us.”
effort to ensure continuity of the funds, it will have to conduct the election by mail and pay $2 per ballot for each registered voter in the district. With more than 83,000 voters eligible to cast ballots in Santa Fe Public Schools elections, the cost for the special election would be at least $166,000.
That doesn’t include the costs of advertising the election and educating voters about how the funding would be used — another $10,000 to $15,000, García told the school board Tuesday.
“For me, the biggest issue, and an unintended consequence of the new law, is that for districts like Santa Fe, it creates a substantial funding gap,” García said.
Ivey-Soto said that’s a “legitimate issue” for districts to raise.
“Nobody intended to damage the public schools or their budgets in terms of incurring extra expenses,” he said.
One possible solution is for the Legislature to decide during its next session to cover the costs of special elections for school districts, he said. But it’s unclear if such a move would have enough support to pass through both chambers.
Still, Ivey-Soto said, he was “sorry that the Santa Fe school district has chosen to be confrontational” about the matter.
Joe Guillen, executive director of the New Mexico School Boards Association, said the group will consider approving the Santa Fe school board’s resolution in December.
“I’m sure there will be widespread support for it,” he added.
The district’s objection to the new law has nothing to do with wanting to suppress voter turnout, Guillen said.
“All the school districts always publicize their elections and promote their bond issues, hoping voters come out,” he said. “We realize we have low voter turnout, but those people who care — parents, educators and others who support public education — have always come out for us.”
Joe Guillen, executive director, New Mexico School Boards Association