The Fayette County school tax recall effort should not have failed

Like many Fayette County taxpayers, I am extremely frustrated by the failure of the committee in getting the 5,000 signatures needed to allow a recall vote on the Fayette County Public School board’s tax increase. In my opinion the recall effort failed, not because of lack of interest on the part of taxpayers in having a recall vote, but because of the ham-handed way the committee conducted the petition drive.

Taxpayers may remember that in 2018 the Fayette County Public School board passed a special “Nickel” tax which was sold as raising $13 million dollars for a “safety program”. That tax didn’t generate just $13 million for a safety program, it resulted in over $29 million dollars in additional property taxes. In response to that tax, I and four other Fayette County voters formed a committee to mount a recall vote effort.

While our effort was constrained by an antiquated state law that required more than 14,000 signatures on paper petitions only, we nearly succeeded by gathering over 12,000 signatures before our time expired. After our committee’s experience with the cumbersome and dated process under prior law, primarily in that it did not allow digital signatures on an online form, local attorney Dan Rose and I worked with members of both parties in Frankfort to modernize the recall petition process, including allowing electronic petitions. Statutory changes for that modernization passed on a bi-partisan basis and became law. Thereafter, another law building on our efforts was passed into law that reduced to just 5,000 the required signatures to place a recall vote on the ballot in Fayette County.

Fast forward to Sept. 8, 2022 when the Fayette County School Board approved a tax increase subject to a recall with little explanation or opportunity for prior public input. Even Herald-Leader columnist Linda Blackford wrote that the process of the school board approving this tax increase lacked transparency.

After the passage of this latest tax increase, I attempted to again form a committee to mount the recall effort. However, when I tried to file my committee’s organizing petition for certification, the Fayette County Clerk advised me that just hours earlier another committee had already filed to lead the recall effort.

While their hearts may have been in the right place, the committee that mounted the failed recall effort grossly mismanaged the recall petition effort. How, you may ask? Consider:

▪ The committee failed to create a website with a simple, easy to remember name on which the electronic petition could be found. Instead, they had the electronic petition hosted on a third-party petition website with a virtually unrecognizable name.

▪ The committee failed to even attempt to gather signatures on paper petitions until the 50-day time limit had virtually expired. In fact, the committee chairman explicitly said “we are going to rely solely on the electronic petition,” but then later tried futilely to gather more signatures on paper at the 11th hour.

▪ The electronic petition form constructed by the committee required more information from a voter than the statute even required. The committee’s form required a phone number, email address and an uploaded image of a drivers’ license or other government ID, none of which was required by the updated statute Dan Rose and I helped become law. Of course, many voters who could have been able to type in the required information simply didn’t know how to upload a picture of government ID. How many elderly taxpayers simply couldn’t complete the online petition process? I understand the committee thought the additional information that was requested would allow verification by the county clerk that each electronic petition was actually signed by the voter, but verification could have been made by asking for a driver’s license number instead of a picture or just the last 4 digits of the voters social security number.

▪ There was very little publicity of the recall effort. I am not aware of any paid advertising on local radio or TV, or in the Herald-Leader. Relying entirely on social media eliminates a significant portion of the taxpaying public that does not participate in social media.

I am convinced that had the recall effort been handled more competently with some or all of the above methods employed, the recall vote effort would have easily succeeded.

The debate over school funding and the need for increases will be ongoing. These increases could very well be necessary but with little transparency from the school board and holding public hearings lasting only 30 minutes with no accounting for where the increases will be allocated, the taxpayers have every right to be skeptical of the need. Recalling these tax increases and placing them on the ballot would require the school board to make the case to voters on why such large increases are needed. Why anyone would oppose a public debate and transparency on a budget twice the size of the entire Lexington Fayette County Urban government budget is puzzling.

Ronald Vissing is a local business owner and can be reached at RJVissing@twc.com.