COVERT COLLEGE BOND ISSUE? OPPONENTS HAVE NO SAY ON BALLOT.

Byline: Rick Orlov Staff Writer

Only a small fraction of the 2.1 million voters in the Los Angeles Community College District is expected to show up May 20 to vote on a $980 million bond issue - and due to a quirk in the law, they won't have seen ballot arguments opposing it.

Prior to the March 4 election, LACCD board members put the bond measure on the ballot - their second one in two years - but only if there were a runoff election in May.

One of the four incumbents on the board narrowly missed getting a majority, so a runoff is on the May ballot. Only 8.8 percent of the voters in the sprawling district showed up for the primary and lot fewer are expected for May's vote, which features only a handful of runoff elections.

Under the state Election Code, the deadline for ballot arguments was Feb. 24 - even though it was not known until March 5 that the district would have a May election - and no one wrote an opposing argument.

``Unfortunately, that's the way it works,'' said Los Angeles City Clerk Mike Carey, who is overseeing the election. ``If someone wants to get an argument on the ballot against this, they'll have to go to court.''

That is exactly what Kris Vosburgh of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association says he is considering.

``How can they have a deadline for an election before they even know the election is going to be held?'' Vosburgh said. ``It is utterly ridiculous. Now, voters will be asked to approve something, and no one will be out there to argue against it.''

The election is required because there is a runoff in the district between trustee Mona Field and challenger Joyce Burrell Garcia.

``They put this on the ballot with the thought there would be a runoff,'' Carey said. ``If there hadn't been a runoff, they would have had to put the bond issue off for a year.''

The LACCD board did not decide until January to put the measure before voters - too late for the March 4 election - and told election officials to pull it from the May ballot if there were no runoff election.

The bond measure needs only 55 percent approval to pass. It would raise property taxes $11.45 per $100,000 of assessed valuation or about $34 a year. Proposition A, the $1.2 billion bond issue passed in 2001, added about $43 a year on the average home.

Blair Sillers, assistant to the district chancellor, said the timing was an issue of state election laws and was not left to the board to determine.

``Quite honestly, we would have preferred to be on the March ballot because it would have been what turned out to be a better turnout than we can expect in May and one, we think, more conducive to voting for this,'' Sillers said.

``However, we missed that deadline for the March election by a couple of weeks because we needed more information from the state.''

Sillers said the board had no control over the timing of when ballot arguments are due.

``It's the city that runs the election, and we are living with whatever deadlines they impose,'' Sillers said.

Attorney Kevin Reed, who specializes in election law, said it would be a difficult case to make in court.

``Most judges are reluctant to do anything to disrupt the orderly conduct of an election,'' Reed said. ``It could be there is enough time before the printing deadline to include an argument against an issue.''

Reed said there could be a number of factors involved, such as other jurisdictions included on the ballot as well as translations that would be necessary to comply with other laws.

Assistant City Clerk Frank Martinez said the time lines were laid out in public notices that were published in February, and that those familiar with the election process were aware of the deadlines.

Also, he said, if the Jarvis group is going to court, it should do so promptly because of the printing deadlines.

``We are already working with the printers on this and we want to get the sample ballot to voters a month before the election,'' Martinez said. ``We're talking 2.1 million registered voters - and that's not something we can pull together overnight.''

Martinez estimated that printing would begin in late March or early April.

The new bond issue would pay to complete work from the $1.2 billion Proposition A measure approved by voters two years ago.

Under the measure, the district would complete a student food services and culinary arts building at Mission College in Sylmar; finish the agricultural-nursing-science building at Pierce College in Woodland Hills; and build a child development center at Valley College in Valley Glen, among other projects.

``We don't think the new bond issue is needed,'' Vosburgh said. ``Or, the district lied to voters two years ago when they said the $1.2 billion bond issue then would finish all the projects they were proposing.''