While the three proposed amendments to the Kaua’i County Charter have not generated much publicity, the same cannot be said for the three proposed amendments to the state Constitution. In particular, an amendment which if approved would allow private schools
While the three proposed amendments to the Kaua’i County Charter have not generated much publicity, the same cannot be said for the three proposed amendments to the state Constitution.
In particular, an amendment which if approved would allow private schools to lobby the state Legislature for issuance of tax-free, special-purposes revenue bonds, has divided public- and private-school leaders.
The Hawaii Association of Independent Schools, leaders in both houses of the state Legislature, and others are in favor of the proposal, which representatives contend won’t cost taxpayers a penny, and will allow private schools access to low-interest funds for repairs and new construction.
The Hawaii State Teachers Association and certain other unions are against the proposal, arguing that it would take the focus off of badly needed and long-delayed public-school improvements.
Karen Ginoza, HSTA president, said the state Constitution is clear that it is the state’s responsibility to support public schools, not private schools.
Representatives in favor of question two argue that the Constitution already allows issuance of special-purpose revenue bonds (SPRBs) for private hospitals, early childhood learning centers and other private entities, to finance construction projects, and that question two would simply amend the Constitution to allow private schools to do the same.
Issuance of SPRBs is according to the state Constitution to serve the public good, like public schools, and unlike private schools, Ginoza argued.
“This state needs to really put the priority on public education,” she said. “The support should be for public schools.”
The state Legislature approved the proposed amendments to the state Constitution that will appear on the general election ballot.
Question two also asks voters if smaller private schools should be able to join forces to apply for SPRBs.
Representatives of the state Legislative Reference Bureau reason that, realistically, the amendment if approved would only benefit large private schools on O’ahu, which have the finances and stable student enrollments to fund the bond issuance.
“This is setting poor public policy,” Ginoza said.
“For Kaua’i, you really won’t get the value of this, because you don’t have very many private schools that are K-12 (kindergarten through 12th grade),” she continued.
“With the $600 million backlog of repair and maintenance (of existing public schools), let’s put the emphasis on that,” Ginoza said.
While SPRBs don’t cost taxpayers any money, there will be loss of tax revenues associated with the issuance of them, Ginoza said, because the SPRBs are tax-free instruments.
The Build Schools, Build Futures Committee is funding the campaign in support of question two, urging voters to “vote yes for school bonds.”
Basically, those in favor of the proposal indicate that the proposal would if approved allow the state’s 130 private schools serving over 50,000 students access to less-expensive, private financing to improve classroom facilities statewide, without spending any taxpayer money.
While the proposed constitutional amendment has generated a fair amount of debate, it may also qualify for a world record in terms of length of question.
The entire question is around 90 words:
“Shall the State be authorized to issue special purpose revenue bonds and use the proceeds from the bonds to assist not-for-profit nonsectarian and sectarian elementary schools, secondary schools, colleges and universities; and to combine into a single issue of special purpose revenue bonds two or more proposed issues of special purpose revenue bonds to assist not-for-profit private nonsectarian and sectarian elementary schools, secondary schools, colleges, and universities, separately authorized, in a total amount not exceeding the aggregate of the proposed separate issues of special purpose revenue bonds?”
County voters will be able to express their desires at the Tuesday, Nov. 5 general election on the three charter and three constitutional questions.
The first constitutional question asks if a candidate for state Senate or state House should be required to be a qualified voter (and resident) in the district before filing nomination papers for the primary election.
Under present law, a candidate could run in a district primary while living outside the district, win the primary over candidates who are district residents, but not actually commit to moving into the district until the day of the general election.
Also, it is common practice, especially on O’ahu, for potential politicians to consider entering House and Senate races where there is no incumbent even if the potential politicians live outside the district.
Finally, the third constitutional question proposes to allow felony charges to be initiated in writing. Currently, the state Constitution requires that felony prosecutions be initiated either through grand jury indictment or filing of a complaint following a preliminary hearing.
For state constitutional questions, a majority of those taking ballots must vote “yes” on questions in order for them to become law. Blank votes are counted as “no” votes.
