RALEIGH – Do voters just not care about the children?

If true, this would leave a whole generation of North Carolina politicians – the generation that took power in, say, 1976 – with gaping holes in their stump speeches. But despite the fact that recent polls in the two largest urban centers in the state, Charlotte and Raleigh, demonstrated extreme frostiness towards expensive school-bond packages, that doesn’t mean that the frigidity extends to giving children the schools they need to succeed. What it tells us, and should tell the political establishment, is that most North Carolinians are not about to agree to billions of dollars in additional cost for school construction without seeing a far more reasonable approach to the issue.

While enrollment growth is pressing many communities across the state to draft bond packages, the multi-billion-dollar wish lists in Charlotte and Raleigh make up a large share of the amount school systems as a whole are seeking – nearly $10 billion in just the next five years, according to a recent survey of districts. Moreover, these two communities are the media centers of the state and would draw disproportionate attention in any event. And both communities are currently in the midst of citizen-advisory processes in which a diverse group of individuals are supposed to come up with solutions that can meet the public-approval test in the coming months and years (I’m on the Wake County panel, in the interest of disclosure, while Lindalyn Kakadelis from our North Carolina Education Alliance is serving on the Charlotte-Mecklenburg committee).

I don’t know whether either or both process will truly yield a salable set of solutions, but here are some principles I hope get inculcated into any final reports:

• Seek out best practices. School systems in other fast-growing states and some foreign countries have already been through what North Carolina’s metros are facing right now. They’ve been compelled by fiscal realities to think outside the box, and in some cases have come up with innovative ideas that we should adopt, including smaller schools, less-expensive construction materials, and build-lease arrangements with private firms.

• Don’t see this as a revenue problem. School construction in North Carolina is mostly a local function, and local revenues have grown rapidly in most communities that have also experienced enrollment surges. North Carolina’s average tax burden is near the national median and high for the Southeast region already. There is no justification for new exactions, especially taxes and fees that are less visible than the much-maligned property tax. The real issue is how to set priorities with the significant revenue growth expected in coming years.

• Rely on options and choices. While there is obviously a savings in using prototypes to build new schools, that doesn’t mean every school has to have the same amenities. The charter-school movement and Charlotte’s privately funded voucher program have demonstrated that there is a huge pent-up demand for educational alternatives, despite the fact that these alternatives typically feature smaller campuses, tighter spaces, less ornate buildings, and fewer non-academic facilities. Parental choice is a policy solution to the challenges of school construction for at least two important reasons: 1) students attending charter or private schools, even with some taxpayer subsidy, represent students that do not have to be housed at great expense by school districts; and 2) when students are giving options rather than jerked around, their parents and grandparents are more likely to look upon the district with favor and support their bond issues.

That’s not too much to ask, is it?

Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation.