Bond Referendum
Running Head: Bond Referendum
Involving Community Members in the
Bond Referendum Process:
A Literature Review
1
Bond Referendum
Abstract
Today’s economic and global climate demands high levels of
public support for public education. Across the nation many
school districts are using dilapidated buildings and facilities.
Further, urban sprawl continues to redistribute America’s
population, altering the needs of many school districts
(Frumkin, 2002). In order to remedy structural deficits in a
school district, large construction projects are necessary.
However, such projects typically require substantial tax
increases, necessitating the passage of a bond referendum.
Clear, constant communication is the key to successfully passing
a bond referendum for a school district (Holt, Wendt, & Smith,
2006). Given the findings of the literature review, the
components of an initiative proposal to further a bond
referendum with community members will be identified by the
researcher.
2
Bond Referendum
Introduction
Today’s economic and global climate demands high levels of
public support for public education. Across the nation many
school districts are using dilapidated buildings and facilities.
In the year 2000, the General Accounting Office reported that
one third of all school districts in the nation had one or more
buildings that needed to be repaired or replaced (US General
Accounting Office, 2000). The average age of school facilities
is 42 years (Holmes, 2000). Further, urban sprawl continues to
redistribute America’s population, altering the needs of many
school districts (Frumkin, 2002).
In order to remedy structural deficits in a school
district, large construction projects are necessary. However,
such projects typically require substantial tax increases,
necessitating the passage of a bond referendum. The rules
regarding bond referendums vary from state to state, but one
thing is certain: Passing a bond referendum requires immense
community support. This can be a daunting task because a large
percentage of voters in the community do not have students
participating in the public school system (Lifto & Senden,
2008).
Clear, constant communication is the key to successfully
passing a bond referendum for a school district. Engaging
community members vibrantly and consistently can assist school
3
Bond Referendum
districts. Research and history has documented that successful
campaigns have common themes, ideas, and procedures related to
community interaction and community contact (Holt, Wendt, &
Smith, 2006). Given the findings of the literature review, the
components of an initiative proposal to further the bond
referendum with community members will be identified by the
researcher.
Overview
This review of relevant literature details the components
that assist community engagement when passing a bond referendum.
Research has demonstrated that obtaining accurate perceptions
(Lifto & Senden, 2008), expanding community education programs
(Oberholtzer, 1949), packaging a bond with other attractive
community items (Ghent & Grant, 2007), and getting out the “yes”
vote (Fairbank, 2006) can highly impact success for school
districts. Each of these components will be utilized in tandem
to achieve the greatest positive results possible.
Obtaining accurate perceptions. Fairbank (2006) suggests
beginning the bond referendum process with a comprehensive
survey or poll. This information can help a school district
identify which projects are likely to be supported by the
community at the current time. Fairbank (2006) does not suggest
trying to raise funds for every conceivable project at one time.
Instead, he recommends closely analyzing polling and survey data
4
Bond Referendum
to determine less than 5 projects to package at once. Including
too many projects at one time can distort the message that a
school district sends to voters. Further, if voters do not
support one segment of the project, they may vote down the
entire bill, increasing the number of “no” votes.
Lifto and Senden (2008) remind school district officials to
ensure that all groups are taken into consideration.
Specifically, “alumni parents” are community members that need
to be accessed. These individuals are frequent voters, and 54.4
percent of alumni parents voted in four or five recent district
elections (Lifto & Senden, 2008). “Alumni parents” are parents
whose children have graduated from the school within recent
years. While it may seem likely that this cohort of individuals
would support schools, research has shown that community members
meeting this profile are often not in favor of expanding school
buildings (Lifto & Senden, 2008). Specifically, this group of
individuals is likely to be focusing upon personal retirement
and the rising cost of college education. Due to this, these
individuals are less likely to support a bond referendum for a
school district. To engage these community members, constant
communication in conjunction with significant community
programming is recommended.
Learning the perceptions of different groups of community
members is an essential step for school districts when planning
5
Bond Referendum
to pass a bond referendum. Finding a proposal that will be
supported by needs of the community is foundational.
Expanding community education programs. When seeking to
positively influence the community regarding the need for new
buildings or facilities, the presence of community education
programs is vital. Community members without children attending
school are more likely to vote for a bond referendum if they
have a personal investment or experience with the school
facilities (Holt, Wendt, & Smith, 2006). Further, the use of
school tours can help to educate the public about the needs for
a new building and the possibilities that a new building would
bring to the community (Oberholtzer, 1949).
Specifically, sending a message that the community and the
school district “need each other” can be helpful. In North
Carolina, a community college used this message to remind
community members of the vibrant community education programs
that were provided within the facilities. Further, the school
reached out to the community, reminding them that their presence
on campus enhanced the school experience for everyone (Selingo,
2000).
In addition to publicizing the community programs, school
districts can offer to increase programs with the help of the
new facility (Oberholtzer, 1949). Adding swimming programs in
school pools, technology literacy programs in school media
6
Bond Referendum
centers, and babysitting services in family and consumer science
center are a few examples of attractive programs to local
residents. Creating a plan and sharing the plan with the
community using pamphlets, the Internet, and local community
organizations is a method to increase community members’
engagement levels with the school district.
Packaging bonds. Packaging a bond with other items that are
valued by the community can increase the likelihood of residents
to vote in favor of a bond referendum. Werbal (2001) suggests
putting several worthy public projects together to bring more
voters out to the polls. For example, including local libraries,
outdoor tracks, and community meeting facilities in the bond
referendum has been successful with many school districts in the
past.
It is important to not that packaging many different items
into a single bond referendum must be considered carefully. Most
importantly, this practice has come under the scrutiny of law in
several areas. The United States Supreme Court investigated a
Georgia case that involved a packaged bond referendum. Although
the school district was not found to be in violation, such
negative press can be extremely detrimental to the campaign
(Walsh, 1991). Further, if you put too many projects together,
residents may suffer from “sticker shock.” To avoid this,
Fairbank (2006) suggests using the data that you have collected
7
Bond Referendum
in planning phases to guide the number of items that are
included in the bond referendum. Creating a package that is
attractive to a large sector of the voters is a delicate balance
that must consider the needs, perceptions, and ideas of
community members. However, using this method can powerfully
affect change for school districts.
Getting out the yes vote. To ensure that voters go to the
polls on election night, there are several research-based
strategies that can be used. Building a campaign organization,
mass call surveys, and a focus on “yes” votes are all suggested
(Piele, 1983). First, it is essential to identify prominent
community members to lead the initiative and the fundraising.
Since campaigns can be costly, gaining partnerships in the
community can be extremely helpful. Sharing information with
local businesses is a good strategy. Identifying organizations
such as the YMCA or Lion’s Club can also be helpful. Once a
leadership team has been designated, this group can meet the
needs of the community members for information and forum
sessions. While the district administration still needs to reach
out to the community directly, the campaign team can greatly
support the effort.
Next, mass call surveys are important (Fairbank, 2006). All
community members should receive a phone call or email. After
the message is delivered, a two questions survey should follow.
8
Bond Referendum
The survey should ask residents how they intend to vote in the
bond referendum and their level of certainty regarding their
decision. It is important to note that the results of these
surveys should drive the campaign.
Holt, Wendt, and Smith (2006) strongly suggest that school
districts only focus on “yes” votes after the initial survey.
The authors note that school districts typically do not have the
financial resources or time to change the minds of voters in the
community, but they can encourage voters who support their
ideals to share their views and vote on the day of the election.
Further, the campaign organization targeting the community
should also focus on “yes” votes. This strategy has been proven
to be successful in a variety of school districts across the
nation (Holt, Wendt, & Smith, 2006). Focusing on the positive
community members is the most effective and efficient method
when attempting to pass a bond referendum.
Conclusion
Engaging community members in the bond referendum process
is a vital component for success. By appropriately monitoring
community perceptions, expanding community education programs,
packaging bonds, and getting out the “yes” vote, school
districts can adequately reach community members. If community
members are involved in the school district, then they will be
likely to support necessary building and construction projects.
9
Bond Referendum
Forging connections with the community is essential for the
overall health of a school district. A school district cannot
achieve its mission and vision alone. It must be a joint effort
between all involved parties!
10
Bond Referendum
11
References
Fairbank, R. (2006). Win a bond referendum. American School
Board Journal, 106, 42-44.
Frumkin, H. (2002). Urban sprawl and public health. Public
Health Reports, 117, 201-217.
Ghent, L., & Grant, A. (2007). Are voting and buying behavior
consistent? Public Finance Review, 6, 669-688.
Holmes, N. (2000). New GAO report finds construction
expenditures grew 39 percent between 1990-1997. AASA
Leadership News. Retrieved January 10, 2010 from
http://www.aasa.org/leadershipnews.htm
Holt, C. Wendt, M., & Smith, R. (2006). School bond success: an
exploratory case study. The Rural Educator, 27(2), 11-18.
Lifto, D. & Senden, B. (2008). The forgotten alumni. American
School Board Journal, 108, 28-30.
Oberholtzer, K.E. (1949). A program of community education.
Educational Leadership, 7(1), 13-14.
Piele, P.K. (1983). Public support for public schools: The past,
the future, and the federal role. Teachers College Record,
84(3), 690-707.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (2000). School facilities:
Construction expenditures have grown significantly in
recent years. Retrieved January 10, 2010 from
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/HEHS-00-41
Bond Referendum
12
Selingo, J. (2000). Big bucks and cooperation mark bond campaign
in california. Chronicle of Higher Education, 47(8), 29-31.
Walsh, M. (1991). Court asked to re-examine board use of
multiple bond-project referendums. Education Week, 10(40),
41-42.
Werbal, R. (2001). Factors influencing voting results of local
transportation funding initiatives with s substantial
transit component: case studies of ballot measures in
eleven communities. Mineta Transportation Institute,
Retrieved January 10, 2010 from
http://transweb.sjsu.edu/mtiportal/research/publications/su
mmary/0117.html