“Hired Guns” and “Legitimate Voices”: The Politics and Participants of Levy Campaigns in Five Ohio School Districts

Background: In Ohio, levy campaigns are a burdensome task for district administrators and stakeholders alike. To date, there is little research on the districts’ role in crafting school budget referenda campaigns. Purpose: This study asked three research questions: How did the macropolitical contexts shape stakeholders’ decision making in terms of campaign strategizing and participation? How did the micropolitical contexts shape stakeholder decision making in terms of campaign strategizing and participation? How did successful districts differ in political strategies from districts that were not successful? Research Design: Qualitative case studies. Data Collection: Twenty-three informants from five Ohio school districts with levies on the November 2008 ballot. Using a snowball sampling technique, initial informants (i.e., superintendent, treasurer) were asked to identify additional stakeholders who participated in the campaigns. Data Analysis: Coding was initially guided by multiple theoretical frameworks, including macro/micropolitics, Johnson’s 21 campaign strategies and Anderson’s framework of “authentic” participation. After coding, an iterative team memo-writing process was used. Findings: This study offers important insight into the complexities of the environments and strategies used in levy campaigns. Four macropolitical themes were identified—state campaign policies, state education finance policy, the high-profile nature of the Presidential election, and the state of the economy. Despite a small sample, districts varied greatly in strategies used and community involvement. Districts that heavily engaged community members and created a sense of urgency yielded greater success at the polls than “central office campaigns.” Adequate message training for campaign participants was also integral to success.