Unlikely allies unite to oppose Wake school bonds

Forced year-rounds set backers on edge

Put opponents of Wake County's proposed $970 million bond issue in the same room and you will find a lot of disagreement.

Some want no mandatory year-round schools. Some want everyone to be at a year-round school. Some want a smaller bond issue with no property tax increase. Some want a bigger bond issue with a higher tax increase.

But one thing they all agree on is this: They want to defeat next month's bond request.

"This is a broad coalition of people with a number of different ideas," said Dallas Woodhouse, a spokesman for the North Carolina chapter of Americans for Prosperity, which favors limited government and opposes the school bonds.

The coalition, which will hold a campaign kickoff rally today, is calling itself Wake Citizens for Quality Education. The group appears to be a formidable opponent for bond supporters, especially with its infusion of parents opposed to mandatory year-round schools.

"If there was no conversion to mandatory year-round, it [approval] would be a definite slam dunk," said Phil Zachary, one of the leaders of Friends of Wake County, the group promoting the bond issue.

Bond opposition is expected from groups such as the Wake County Taxpayers Association and Americans for Prosperity. Both dislike new taxes and think the Wake school system needs to be reformed. But what has shaken up the campaign are the parents, many of whom have supported bond issues in the past.

Sales of the bonds would help cover the cost of converting 19 elementary schools and three middle schools to a year-round calendar next year. The bonds are also part of a plan that calls for building elementary and middle schools that would operate on a year-round calendar.

Wake is adding year-round schools because they can hold more students by putting buildings in constant use. Students are split into four groups, with three in class and one on break at all times.

Parents whose children would attend the mandatory year-round schools complain that the schedule will split families if the students also have siblings who attend traditional-calendar schools. They also complain that the loss of long summer breaks will hurt activities such as family get-togethers and summer camps.

"If they took mandatory year-round out of the bond, the majority of people in [our group] would vote for it," said Dave Duncan, co-founder of Stop Mandatory Year-Round, the parent group opposing the referendum.

Zachary countered by saying that opponents need to focus on how the bonds would help pay for 17 new schools and renovations to 13 schools. It would also allow smaller repairs, new computers and maintenance projects at 100 schools along with land and design costs for 13 future schools. He said a bond issue is the cheapest and most effective way to keep up with needs.

"I too want choice in life," Zachary said. "But sometimes we all need to sacrifice our personal agenda for the greater good."

Zachary said he thinks the bond opponents are just a "growing but vocal minority." He said most voters haven't decided yet.

But state Rep. Russell Capps, president of the Taxpayers Association, said he expects that the bond issue will be defeated in the Nov. 7 referendum.

"I'm not rejoicing over the bonds going down, but I think there is a better way," Capps said.

If the bonds fail, the question will be what emerges as the compromise and who will have more sway when it comes to a Plan B.

Duncan said he expects the coalition to split.

Most members of his group want a bigger bond issue that would eliminate mandatory year-round schools by building more traditional-calendar schools, he said.

But both Americans for Prosperity and the Taxpayers Association would lobby for different alternatives. Among the things they are proposing are a smaller bond issue, countywide election of school board members, more neighborhood schools and fewer renovations of older schools.

"We feel this election is really about reforming the school system," said Fran DeLuca, director of the state chapter of Americans for Prosperity. "An endorsement of the bonds is the endorsement of the way it's headed. A rejection ... is a signal to the school system that things aren't well."