Should Cary Dist. 26 pop the question?

Does a school district or other unit of government bear any responsibility if it asks taxpayers for more money and the taxpayers agree to pay more?

That seems to be one of the central questions school districts face as they decide whether to go to referendum - especially in tough economic times.

The answer may help determine whether the Cary Elementary District 26 school board decides to place a question on the November ballot.

The district, which is facing a serious budget crisis that will may require $5.5 million in additional cuts over the next three years, in considering asking taxpayers if they would like to help.

Taxpayers said "no" last year - but that was before the district laid off about 80 teachers, closed Maplewood School and eliminated art, music and physical education.

Still, most people who have spoken out on the issue, including supporters of a tax increase, say taxpayers are still decidedly against giving more money to a district that in their eyes has not done a good job of managing their investment.

But while conceding that, several residents and board members in recent weeks have asked the following question: Why not just give taxpayers the choice?

A colleague of mine put it this way: If taxpayers approve an increase, they are responsible for the higher taxes they will have to pay for years. If residents reject any increase, the responsibility for any decline in educational quality will also be theirs (though school officials would be ill-advised to mention this).

I rather like this argument, but there are also some strong counterarguments.

For one, by putting a question on the ballot, the district sets into motion a chain of events that could end in a substantial tax increase. Simply approving that ballot language makes the district partly responsible for high tax rates that could drive some people out of Cary (or keep them from moving there).

Many feel District 26 has not done a good job of managing its finances (at least until the current board committed to balancing the budget). A tax increase would only lessen the pressure on elected and appointed officials to get their finances in order.

District officials and consultants have already spent time and energy to come up with several referendum options. They will have to spend more hours meeting legal requirements, finalizing details and perhaps educating the public if the board decides to go to referendum.

Assuming passage of a tax hike is unlikely, this time, some argue, could be better spent figuring out how the district can live within its means while maintaining high educational standards.

Some people feel that while asking the question isn't exactly equivalent to unilaterally raising taxes, simply asking the question shows disregard for taxpayers who may already be struggling to pay their bills and mortgages.

Clearly, both sides have a point. Whose arguments are stronger? I don't know.

But that is a question District 26 board members will have to decide before Aug. 30 -- their deadline to put a question on the fall ballot.