“They should be holding the district’s feet to the fire on what they’re spending plan is,” he said. “If this thing does fail, what really is going to happen?”

If voters defeat the M&O override, the extension approved in 2001 will start to decrease by one-third for three years as prescribed by law. This means without approval, DVUSD will take in about $4.8 million less in 2006.

With that much missing revenue, district officials said something in the budget will have to give.

Years ago when facing a financial crunch, the district increased class sizes, eliminated assistant principals at schools with less than 1,000 students and pulled other positions such as counselors and playground monitors off campuses.

Without the M&O override extension, those positions, which have mostly been filled in recent times, would likely once again be first on the chopping block.

“I would think you would have to do cuts because you’re looking at almost $5 million and it’s pretty hard to absorb that much,” said DVUSD Governing Board President Christy Agosta.

“Last time we made it a priority to preserve the individual, but many of them had different positions,” Ms. Agosta added of potential cuts.

Capital Override

It may feel like deja vu.

A capital override request for $52.5 million is a near identical request — $500,000 more — denied by 52 percent of DVUSD voters in November 2004, when voters approved a $90 million bond and a separate measure to join West-MEC.

Voters in 10 Arrowhead Ranch-area precincts were evenly split on the capital override with 50 percent on each side.

School administrators and two political action committees hope education efforts over the summer turn this small margin around.

“Whenever they see anything that resembles a tax, they need to be advised what it’s all about. That’s why we put the effort in we have,” said Alan Richardson, chairman of the Deer Valley Support Our Schools, a political action committee supporting both DVUSD overrides.

DVUSD officials say the school district’s need for computers, books and equipment has not gone away, noting these items were funded through bonds before 1998. Voters tend to support bonds, district leaders said, but get confused by new education funding mechanisms authorized by the Arizona Legislature with the creation of the School Facilities Board.

“We used to buy all that equipment with bonds and the community always has been a very strong supporter, passing the requests for the bonds by healthy margins but now it’s presented in a different way; I think that’s what a lot of the confusion is,” Ms. Agosta said.

The override amount recommended by a citizen-inclusive election committee would cover $7.5 million each year for seven years.

If passed, funds are earmarked for new social studies books in all grades districtwide. At costs exceeding $100 per book, this could easily reach $2 million, district officials said, adding they hope to replace textbooks in one subject each year during the capital override’s seven-year cycle.

Another top need is keeping up to date with an inventory of more than 6,000 computers. The district is transitioning from Macintosh to Dell computers, which are easier to fix and upgrade with new software, said Kent Davis, associate superintendent of support services.

With the bulk of money designated for technology, DVUSD leaders aim to bring a ratio of one computer per six students closer to one per five. They also want to equip teachers with a laptop, a move made in about a half-dozen newer schools.

The money would also go toward replacing carpet, paint, desks and lunchroom tables.

The breakdown: $27 million for technology; $15 million for textbooks; $7 million for classroom and cafeteria furniture and equipment; $1.25 million for sports uniforms and equipment for middle and high schools; $1.25 million for fine arts uniforms and equipment; and $1 million for vehicles.

Citing an example of aging equipment, Mr. Richardson said many of the district’s old vehicles cost more to repair than replace.

“We cannot buy the car out of our M&O budget. We have to have the capital override to do that,” he emphasized.

In regard to capital outlay overrides, Mr. Hunter suggested in addition to examining the financial impact of an increased tax, voters scrutinize how current revenue streams are used to determine whether the override is needed.

“Part of what the discussion needs to be on the capital outlay is: Are these expenditures things that could have been done in some other way?” he said.