When Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger first spoke of refinancing the state’s debt through a multibillion-dollar bond initiative, many local educators feared the proposition would siphon votes from a similarly massive school construction bond measure on the same March 2 ballot.

But with K-12 schools faring relatively well in Schwarzenegger’s initial spending plan, South Bay-area school officials are now keeping their fingers crossed that voters back the governor’s $15 billion budget bailout, known as Proposition 57. Otherwise, they say, local districts are in for unprecedented cutbacks in programs and staffing. “I don’t even want to estimate how much we would lose,” Redondo Beach schools chief Carol Leighty said. “You’re cutting bone then, you’re not just cutting fat.”

Said Lawndale Superintendent Joseph Condon, “If he has to whack $15 billion out, you’re going to have a lot of pain.”

Condon, like others, said it took awhile to warm to the idea of Proposition 57.

“I looked at it and said, ‘I’m not quite sure where it fits and why we’re doing that,’ ” he said. “Then, when I read more and looked at the budget, I found that becomes the linchpin of the budget.”

With a $12.3 billion school facilities bond measure floated on the same day, California taxpayers will be asked to take on a nearly $30 billion burden to help resolve the state’s financial crisis while renovating aging public school campuses. Educators and policymakers acknowledge it’s a lot to ask.

Early polls show voters are less than enthusiastic about refinancing the state deficit and split on school construction. Both require majority approval.

Only 35 percent of likely voters said they would vote yes on Schwarzenegger’s Proposition 57, according to a survey released last week by the Public Policy Institute of California. Forty-four percent said they would not support it and 21 percent were undecided.

Meanwhile, about half of the likely voters said they were in favor of the facilities bond measure. The institute’s poll showed that 38 percent were opposed to Proposition 55, the school construction bond measure, and 12 percent were undecided. Steven Fish, superintendent of Torrance Unified School District, said Proposition 55 wouldn’t have much, if any, impact on his district, which has finished its modernization projects. But, he said, passage of Proposition 57 will be the financial difference between bad and worse for TUSD.

“That to us is really important,” Fish said. “If those bonds don’t pass in March, I’m going to cut twice as much out of my budget.”

Not including some $800,000 in midyear cuts that still have to be made, Torrance currently has to trim about $2 million from its 2004-05 budget. Should Proposition 57 fail, Fish anticipates that number will rise as high as $5.5 million.

Making matters more difficult is the timing of the election. Because teachers with credentials have to be notified of potential layoffs by March 15, school officials will likely have to move quickly in the event that voters reject the so-called Economic Recovery Bond Act.

Fish said that, under the circumstances, he expects the state will relax some of its deadlines. He also says Torrance would probably avoid laying off credentialed teachers by terminating temporary employees and long-term substitutes.

The Lennox School District, meanwhile, is keeping a close eye on both propositions. In addition to fearing further revenue hits, Superintendent Bruce McDaniel said officials there are hoping to acquire some $30 million in construction funds to build a new campus for the district’s charter school, known as the Lennox Math, Science and Technology Academy.

McDaniel said he worries that having two multibillion-dollar initiatives side-by-side on a ballot may frighten voters.

“I’m still concerned about that,” he said. “That’s such a huge number for the voters to look at when you put those two together. It’s going to be unfortunate if one clouds the other in a negative way.”

Officials with districts in Lawndale, Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach also said they’re hoping for money from the state to wrap up modernization projects. And even with the bigger general fund budget issues looming, don’t expect districts to put their construction needs on the back burner, said Mary Perry, deputy director of EdSource, a Menlo Park-based nonprofit group that analyzes education issues in California.

“I don’t see the education community being complacent about that measure,” she said. Perry said there will be plenty of lobbying for Proposition 55 — just as there was for its sister initiative, the $13 billion Proposition 47 in 2002 — but it remains to be seen whether educators will campaign as loudly for the state’s economic recovery bond. (A California Teachers Association official said his organization plans to make an endorsement decision at its next meeting.)

Perry points out that while school officials agreed to accept $2 billion less than what they were owed next year, they still made it through the first budget proposal relatively unscathed — and that’s only because everyone’s banking on the passage of Proposition 57.

“That deal is predicated on the assumption that that $15 billion bond passes,” she said. “What happens to the state budget if it doesn’t is, frankly, anyone’s guess.”