The March 2 primary ballot is overloaded with requests for much-needed funds from occupants of the statehouse to city hall. Voters, however, will not approve all of these requests for tax dollars.

Some will fail as voters throughout the state decide which of the numerous state, regional, county and local dollar measures they are willing to support. Public officials from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to mayors and school board members are, after all, asking us to add more than $30 billion to the public debt.

If approved, the two state bond measures alone -- Propositions 55 and 57 -- would add a record $27.3 billion to the state's general fund bond debt, which was $36 billion in November with another $21 million in authorized-but-not-yet-sold bonds waiting in the wings. If both propositions pass, the state's debt-service ratio would soar past 6 percent, the benchmark beyond which many fiscal wizards say the state should not go. Legislative analyst Elizabeth Hill's office projects it would climb to between 6.4 and 6.9 percent.

And that is without considering the additional drag on taxpayers of numerous local and regional tax plans, such as Measure A in Alameda County, which raises its sales tax a half-cent to the highest in the state in order to gain $90 million a year for its ailing public health system.

Something has to give. And, considering the huge state deficits with which we've been saddled the past couple years, it should probably be Prop. 55, the $12.3 billion second part of a record $25.35 billion bond for school construction, repair and modernization.

The first half, $13.05 billion, passed as Prop. 47 with 59 percent of the vote in 2002. To keep the state's debt ratio under 6 percent the next few years, however, either Prop. 55 or Gov. Schwarzenegger's $15 billion Economic Recovery Bond, Prop. 57, would have to fail.

March 2 is not an ordinary election. Last year's recall election was more than rejection of an unpopular politician, Gov. Gray Davis. It doubled as a clarion call to fix California's deficit problem. That remains the top priority as Californians go to the polls next month.

Even by consolidating the state's debt with passage of Prop. 57, we won't be out of the fiscal forest. Another $14 billion must be eliminated to balance the books during the upcoming 2004-05 fiscal year.

We agree wholeheartedly with a dozen or so school and higher education advocates who recently pointed out to us the need to replace and upgrade outdated, decaying facilities and alleviate overcrowding. And, more massive investment would be needed after funds from Propositions 47 and 55 are used up. For investing in education is a noble, never-ending task.

But, as it turns out, Prop. 55 is a good plan hampered by bad timing. Circumstances have changed since Propositions 47 and 55 were slated for ballots two years ago. Erasing the state deficit and restoring us to some semblance of financial equilibrium is, and must be, the top priority.

The school bonds also are costly. We would pay back twice the amount received -- $24.7 billion over 30 years.

Schools need the money. Although bringing this ballot measure back for reconsideration this fall may be too soon, advocates can take hope in the legislative analyst noting that, if rejected by voters, Prop. 55 is required to appear again on the November ballot.

On March 2, however, we recommend against voting for Prop. 55. It is a question of priorities and the amount of public debt we assume.