During our Red County Radio Roundtable on Friday, the topic of Measure G came up and both Adam Probolsky and Nick Berardino confidently predicted the $200 million Santa Ana school bond would fail to garner the necessary two-thirds majority and go down to defeat.

One reason is the Orange County Labor Federation paid for this anti-Measure G mail piece that went out last week:



The unions aren't opposed to passing a $200 million school bond. But they're opposed to passing a $200 million school bond that doesn't contain a project labor agreement -- which Measure G lacks.

If I lived in Santa Ana, I'd oppose Measure G, as well, but for a different reason: I don't believe in rewarding failure.

I'm not referring solely to the Santa Ana Unified School District's mismanagement of the previous bond, although that episode should make anyone think twice before entrusting the SAUSD with another pot of bond money.

I mean the overall failure of SAUSD schools. Instead of rattling the tin cup for more tax dollars, why doesn't the SAUSD work within its existing resources to provide a better education. Are we supposed to believe the education being provided in SAUSD classroom will magically improve if the classrooms are nicer?

My suggestion is for SAUSD to first improve the quality of education going on inside of their schools before going back to the taxapyers for more money to fix up the schools. It's not as if SAUSD students are uneducable. The children in the district's fundamental schools do very well. Here's a brainstorm: why not make every SAUSD school a fundamental school, instead of restricting them to the fortunate few parents who win the entry lottery.

I can think of no other organized enterprise of the scale of public education in which revenues are divorced from the quality of results. Until public education is re-structured so that revenues correlate to a school's success or failure on providing a quality education, bonds like Measure G are just nibbling at the edges.

Vote No on measure G.