Let's see levy campaigns based on just the facts

 

Scanning through our series of "Year in Preview" stories last week, I happened to spot a few detailing school districts' plans to put levies on the ballot in 2010.

I can already hear the protests.

Campaigns opposing school levies have always pretty much sounded the same, and the state of the economy has only made the trend more prominent.

"The people can't afford it" and "The schools don't deserve it" are the two most significant rallying cries. Now the former applies to a much larger chunk of the population, while the latter's comparisons between the public and private sectors are all the more noticeable given the sacrifices made in the private sector.

Those arguments are true for some, but they're overgeneralized. No school district is without a single resident who can afford the levy, and no district budget is entirely devoid of worthwhile expenditures.

Pro-levy campaigns should be subject to the same scrutiny of overgeneralization. They love to trot out the "Your kids' education will suffer if you don't pass the levy" mantra and the "Hey, the state gave us a good rating -- that proves we deserve the money" line.

But they know those things by themselves don't really work anymore. They must go beyond empty campaign platitudes and point to hard facts: cuts made, concessions granted, promises kept.

I'm sure people will question the truth of some things proponents of last fall's successful levies said. But there's no denying the campaigns went beyond what was expected.

Organized levy opposition tends to go beyond the campaign platitudes and dredge up district documents to reinforce points. But thanks in part to pro-levy campaigns' much greater resources, it seemed only a handful of people went really deep into statistics to support anti-levy arguments.

A lot of post-election letters lamenting levy passages placed all the blame for that passage on school promises they don't expect to see kept. But none took any responsibility for their own role in failing to defeat it.

"No" voters truly dedicated to defeating a levy can't just rely on the local opposition campaign. These campaigns might not be able to send out the same types of campaign fliers or garner the support of prominent local officials, but they can point to the arguments against the levy -- preferably ones that aren't antagonistic, as antagonistic arguments tend to alienate voters -- or even get their hands on some district figures and make their own arguments.

Pro-levy campaigns have figured out that they can't get a levy passed on guilt alone. They have to find the best facts to support their point and get them passed along to as many voters as possible.

Anti-levy campaigns know they can't rely entirely on guilt, either -- but getting their data passed on to voters is tougher. That's where individual voters have to get involved, calculating and then disseminating their own information.

You can be one of those people. Maybe you'll find in the district's data something far more likely to garner "no" votes. Or maybe you'll realize the district really is trying its best.

But either way, you'll be much more convincing.