Local politicians and educators are planning their next steps following the May 19 defeat of five of six ballot propositions aimed at reducing the state's budget deficit.

The measures called for a combination of spending caps, tax hikes and borrowing from other funds—but they only received about 35 percent of the vote. A majority was needed to pass.

A sixth proposition freezing politicians' salaries in years that the state is running a deficit won easily with 74 percent.

While the message from Tuesday's election remains unclear given the public's conflicting desire for low taxes and expensive services, State Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Moorpark)who represents the 19th district in MoorparkSimi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Camarillo and Oak Park, said the voters "have spoken."

"The people . . . have sent a clear message to politicians that they are tired with business as usual in Sacramento," Strickland said. "Voters made it clear by (the) election results that they don't want higher taxes or borrowing to solve the budget crisis."

Ventura County Supervisor Peter Foy agreed. Foy represents Moorpark, Simi Valley and surrounding areas.

He is also state chairman of Americans for Prosperity and a cochair of two antiProp. 1A movements, one with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and one with www.defeat1A.com.

"This is an opportunity for us now to go forward and ask the legislature to start finding a real solution," Foy said. "Just like in this county, we've had to find real solutions.

Proposition 1A would have meant $16 billion in tax increases and spending restrictions that would have boosted the state's rainy day fund.

Proposition 1B, which would have earmarked more than $9 billion for education, fared better than the other losing propositions and received 37 percent in favor.

Proposition 1C would have provided $5 billion in borrowing from future lottery revenues. And 1D and 1E called for the taking of almost $1 billion in monies that were promised earlier for child services and mental health care programs.

Representatives from the California School Boards Association said that even if the propositions had passed, the initiatives would not have addressed California's "ongoing structural imbalance between revenues and expenditures."

"Voters have continuously expressed that investing in our children's education is a top priority, yet we are still the first to hit the chopping block," said CSBA Executive Director Scott Plotkin. "It's mind boggling to imagine what these additional cuts will do to our children's future. Hopefully, this will serve as a wakeup call to our state leaders that it is time to do something about the state's irrational funding system for public education."

At a Conejo Valley Unified School District board meeting Tuesday night, administrators and board members checked in on how the propositions were fairing.

"It's not good," said Dep. Superintendent Jeff Baarstad. "I think they're all failing."

Earlier polls had predicted the near total defeat.

But Baarstad, who is head of business services at CVUSD, hadn't been counting on the Prop. 1B money to begin with. He said Conejo schools will need to cut another $4.7 million from the district's budget this fiscal year—which ends in a month. The school district has already been cut by $5.2 million.

"There's really nothing we can do to cut that kind of money by June 1 in any budget," Baarstad said. "We're going to have to use reserves."

Public education isn't the only victim.

City governments almost everywhere in California are also bracing for a reduction in state revenues and will be forced to map out new financial strategies.

"I'm hoping the people are going to see some real good dialogue," Foy said. "It's going to be painful. The schools are being affected, and I don't want to see teachers laid off. And we want to keep public safety in as much as possible. It's the bureaucracy that I want to see shrink."

Strickland said there was "a rumor" in Sacramento that a gas tax would be the only fee increase that could provide the budget with relief, but he said, "If politicians decide to do this I'll be the first to lead the charge on a referendum."

Voter turnout across the state was low. Only about 111,000— or 26 percent—of Ventura County voters either came to the polls or sent an absentee ballot.