In 1994, Silver Falls voters agreed to build a starter high school that would eventually replace the old high school in Silverton. It was completed in 1997 and has housed only ninth graders. The second phase of the plan would require an additional bond to complete the building for the rest of the high school student body.

After two unsuccessful attempts, voters in November approved a bond for $47.5 million to complete the high school project.

There were several reasons for voters to support this plan: uniting high school students in one building would improve instructional services and save costs, and the old school was becoming too expensive to operate. And there was one big reason for voters to hesitate: the high cost to taxpayers.

Sticker shock

For this small community, the estimated bond costs were $2.74 per $1,000 of assessed property value. Added to the bond costs that voters were still paying on the previous bond, the price tag was high.

"There was significant sticker shock for many people in this community," said Superintendent Craig Roessler. "This is a small bedroom community with no commercial property in our tax base. With only homes, tax-deferred timber and agricultural property, a large burden falls on homeowners."

Even with a daunting price tag, voters recognized the need and got behind their schools. Roessler credits a simple plan and passionate advocates.

"We narrowed the focus to a single project," said Roessler. "Measures in 1998 and 2002 included improvements to other buildings, closing schools and changing grade configurations. A plan that is much simpler for the public to understand gives them fewer reasons to object."

Although no scientific research was done, district staff and board members had a good sense of what the public would support: phase two of the original plan. Roessler said the public mandate was to "Do one thing only: what you said you would do when the last bond passed."

Another important key to the bond's success was the group of highly organized, passionate and motivated volunteers advocating for the measure. The group's campaign co-chair had prior campaign experience and connections that resulted in contributions to the campaign.

They also solicited campaign contributions from district vendors. The committee made a public records request for the vendor list. And they sought endorsements from key community leaders for fundraising requests.

Visibility helps move voters

The campaign was highly visible and targeted at the same time. There were yard signs and newspaper ads as well as targeted efforts to reach supportive voters through canvassing previously supportive precincts, and phone banks where all voters were identified and later called with reminders to vote.

The campaign joined district representatives at 15-20 community presentations. Where the district could only provide information, campaign representatives urged voters to support the plan. They produced a video to help illustrate the need.

There was also active volunteer participation by high school students, who participated in phone banks, designed T-shirts and held car washes to raise money.

The collaboration among the district, community members and students will continue in the bond implementation process. The board has appointed a Bond Advisory Committee made up of a members who represent a cross-section of the community to assist with planning for the new high school addition.

"The scope of the bond planning is narrow because the scope of the bond project is narrow-to finish second phase of an existing building, "We hope the committee can also be a vehicle for sharing information with the community."