Vail voters face another override with no clear plan shown

Prop. 423 asks Vail voters to sign a blank check. I'm a retired electrical engineer and an Arizona-certified high school math teacher, and I read the official voter pamphlet the way I'd read any proposal: What does it cost, what does it promise, and how will we know if it worked?

The cost is clear. Prop. 423 renews Vail Unified's 12.5% budget override: about $15.3 million in property taxes the first year and roughly $77 million over the five years it runs at full strength. The pamphlet estimates about $421 a year for an average Vail home. Every Vail homeowner shares that cost, and every one of us has a stake in good schools.

The history is clear, too. Vail voters first approved an override in 1993, and the district has asked for renewals ever since. Voters rejected a renewal in 2010, but a new override passed in 2011.

What isn't clear is what this money is supposed to achieve. The pamphlet lists five purposes, including reducing class size and funding "programs that promote high academic performance." Not one of them comes with a measurable target. There's no goal, no deadline and no yearly report on results. After 33 years, voters are asked to trust that it's working.

So I checked the state's own numbers.

"Reduce class size" has been a stated purpose since 1993. According to the Arizona Auditor General's latest report, for 2024-25, Vail has 21.1 students per teacher, the highest of all 14 school districts in Pima County. The state average is 17.7. That figure counts every certified teacher, including art, music and PE, so it isn't the size of a single classroom, but it's the standard the state uses to compare districts.

In the official voter pamphlet, the override's campaign committee warns that without it, schools face "devastating cuts to competitive teacher pay." Yet Vail's average teacher pay is $57,905, about $7,700 below the state average, according to the same report. And 41% of Vail's teachers are in their first three years, double the state rate and the highest in the Tucson area.

Then there's science. In the Arizona Department of Education's 2025 results, only 29% of Vail's 11th graders were proficient in science. In math, on the ACT, it was around 50% at the four main high schools. Both beat the state average, but seven in 10 still fell short in science. The pamphlet lists STEM as one of the areas the override funds. The S in STEM is science, and the M is math. Yet no purpose sets a target for either.

And not every student is headed to college. Electricians, welders, HVAC technicians, aviation mechanics and medical technicians need strong math and science, too, from reading blueprints to calculating loads and doses. A real plan should prepare every graduate for what comes next, college or career.

Let me be clear about what this is not. It is not a criticism of Vail's teachers, who carry some of the area's heaviest student loads for below-average pay and do a great deal with less. It is not an argument against art, music, PE or student support staff. Those are worthwhile, and I don't dispute that the override pays for them.

It's about accountability. Any engineering project I worked on had a budget, a schedule and measurable goals, reviewed regularly. A $77 million public investment deserves at least that.

Here is what a real plan could look like: specific targets by school and by year for math and science proficiency, college readiness, career and technical education (CTE) programs and certifications, students per teacher and teacher retention, with a public progress report every year. Pima Community College already offers college classes to high school students while they're still enrolled at Vail. Expanding options like that could put more students on track for college and careers.

If the plan works, the next renewal will sell itself. If there is no plan, voters shouldn't be asked to sign another blank check.

Early ballots are in mailboxes now. Read the pamphlet. Check the numbers. Then ask the Governing Board a simple question: Where is the plan? Until there is one, I'm voting no on Prop. 423.