EXCERPT: ...The neighbors formed a group and called it Taxpayers for Accountable School Bond Spending. Their goal: Scrap the stadium lights at nearby Hoover High School, maintain the neighborhood. ...

     ...They hired a lawyer, and filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit against the district for improperly using school bond money to construct the lights and for thumbing its nose at a requirement to properly assess the lights' impact on the neighborhood.

     The residents won. On Sept. 20, the lights went out at Hoover High.

     But the verdict may impact more than just football stadiums. It potentially opens the district to future lawsuits, and could ultimately change the game for how the district pitches bond sales to the public.

     School board member Scott Barnett, the board's often-cited numbers whiz who led the charge for the district's most recent construction bond, Prop. Z, calls the judge's decision "foolhardy" and said it "changed a half century of bond spending policy and practice."

     The legal and political implications of the ruling could negatively impact the school board's latitude to make smart fiscal decisions based on the changing needs of the school district, Barnett said.

     All parties seem to agree that the district should be allowed to modify, in relatively small ways, the list of projects included on the proposition ballot. For example, if early plans called for a school to receive 400 pieces of audiovisual equipment, but it was later discovered the school only needed 300, the change would be seen as responsible. 

      But Felipe Monroig, president of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association, said he's OK with reductions to the list, but opposes any additions.

     "Using (the ballot's project list) merely as a guide that can be diverted from is a 'bait-and-switch' and a blow for transparency," Monroig said. ...

     ... Thus, even if the district wasn't required to include the level of detail it sent out on the ballot, once it's been voted on, it becomes part of the district's stated intent. In short, legal questions are framed by what the district said they were going to do, and judges will hold them to that. ...  

  To read the complete article, please visit: